@U2 Forum

U2 => Tours => Topic started by: TheSceneoftheAccident on February 09, 2012, 06:02:46 AM

Title: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: TheSceneoftheAccident on February 09, 2012, 06:02:46 AM
It doesn't make sense. Pop was a flop (although I personally love the album), so I don't understand why the band played songs like Gone and Please on the Elevation Tour and never play anything again after that, besides the odd time Discotheque was played on Vertigo Tour and the snippets from the 360 Tour. It can't be because they wouldn't fit in with the sets, because some of the songs from Pop would have been sensational on the Vertigo and 360 set ups. If anything the Pop songs didn't fit in with the stuff being played on the Elevation Tour.

My question is, if Pop was such a disaster (according to the press and band members) then why would they play stuff from it on the following tour and then forget about it entirely after that? It doesn't make sense to me. It seems like it should have been the other way around; it would have been understandable if they avoided material from Pop during the Elevation Tour and then slowly started to re-introduce the tracks throughout the Vertigo Tour and 360 Tour. I just don't see how it suddenly became disowned by the band members after the Elevation Tour.

Oh and for the record I can see No Line on the Horizon (and to a lesser extent, How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb) going down the same path.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: spooked1oo on February 09, 2012, 06:50:50 AM
I agree, but the reason why they plated them during Elevation was because they always play the previous album's singles on the tour after. ZooTV got Angel of Harlem and When Love Comes to Town, Popmart got EBTTRT and One, Elevation got Gone and Please, Vertigo got Elevation and Beautiful Day, and 360 got COBL and Vertigo. The next tour will almost definitely have two singles from NLOTH for at least most of the tour. That's just how U2's formula goes. They need to have more Pop next tour though. That long of an absence if they don't play it is inexcusable.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: imaginary friend on February 09, 2012, 10:08:07 AM
8 million sold = flop.

wow...
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: TheSceneoftheAccident on February 09, 2012, 11:18:28 AM
Yes, it is considered a flop in retrospect by a lot of publications. I actually defended it in my OP in case you hadn't caught on. I'm just saying what popular belief of the album is.

"Although an early commercial success at the time of its release — it reached number one in 32 countries, including the UK and the US —Pop's lifetime sales are among the lowest in U2's catalogue, and critical reaction was mixed. It was certified RIAA platinum once, the lowest since the band's album October."

"Pop's lifetime sales are among the lowest in U2's catalogue, and critical reaction was mixed."

Sounds like the media see it as a flop, which is what I was implying. I think it sold closer to 9 or 10 million though.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Kurukira on February 09, 2012, 11:19:43 AM
I can understand its relative obscurity (if you want to call it that), but this album has gems on it.  My feeling is that if they were able to spring Zooropa on us, then I'm sure they could pull off a song or two from Pop.  It would be inexcusable to not have it represented as anything other than snippets at this point, because there's some awesome lyrics in there that need to be more appreciated.

Eight million and still a flop? Yeah, somebody's standards are WAY too high.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Midnight is Where the Day Begins on February 09, 2012, 11:47:11 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Yes, it is considered a flop in retrospect by a lot of publications. I actually defended it in my OP in case you hadn't caught on. I'm just saying what popular belief of the album is.

"Although an early commercial success at the time of its release — it reached number one in 32 countries, including the UK and the US —Pop's lifetime sales are among the lowest in U2's catalogue, and critical reaction was mixed. It was certified RIAA platinum once, the lowest since the band's album October."

"Pop's lifetime sales are among the lowest in U2's catalogue, and critical reaction was mixed."

Sounds like the media see it as a flop, which is what I was implying. I think it sold closer to 9 or 10 million though.

I thought that it was technically only a flop to American audiences? I thought it was a well received otherwise.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: TheSceneoftheAccident on February 09, 2012, 02:04:43 PM
Seems like it must have been big elsewhere considering it sold between 8-10 million and only around 1 million of those sales were US (a lot of albums have most of their sales in the US). If something flops in the US the rest of the world seems to have to call it a flop too.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Johnny Feathers on February 09, 2012, 07:53:41 PM
I don't understand the confusion.  You acknowledge it was a flop, and they pretty much DID drop it entirely for Elevation--the only full song that appeared regularly was Gone.  It was an obvious compromise in trying not to completely disown Pop, which was only the second-most-recent album, and therefore still relatively recent, but knowing that it had basically failed.  At this point, there's no need to "reintroduce" it to audiences if the band themselves weren't happy with it.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Blue Silken Sky on February 09, 2012, 08:35:06 PM
I feel like the odd song may continue to make appearances in a re-worked format.  That acoustic and string-accompanied version of SATS they did at the Clinton Concert was very nice, and Bono made some comment to the effect of "this song should have been a hit." 

I think the band's sensitivity and disappointment with Pop has tempered with time...but I really can't answer the question this thread is posing.  I'll stop now.   :D
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Tumbling Dice on February 10, 2012, 06:05:33 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I feel like the odd song may continue to make appearances in a re-worked format.  That acoustic and string-accompanied version of SATS they did at the Clinton Concert was very nice, and Bono made some comment to the effect of "this song should have been a hit." 

I think the band's sensitivity and disappointment with Pop has tempered with time...but I really can't answer the question this thread is posing.  I'll stop now.   :D

Staring at the Sun was a hit in the UK.  It reached #3 in the charts.

Discotheque was a #1 hit.





Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Droo on February 10, 2012, 06:50:52 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
At this point, there's no need to "reintroduce" it to audiences if the band themselves weren't happy with it.

We are talking about a band that resurrected TWO songs from October in the last decade.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Boom Cha! on February 10, 2012, 07:01:58 PM
They did play Discotheque twice on the Vertigo Tour, but yes they do need to bring back more of the Pop tunes.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: The Unknown Caller on February 10, 2012, 07:31:16 PM
The band don't like it. That doesn't mean that it's impossible we'll see elements of it - they have clearly shown a willingness and even a desire to bring back Discotheque, for instance, as it's made some form of appearance on every tour since PopMart. But just as clearly, they aren't happy with it, since they change it every time. Much as with October, we've only seen the barely-a-song appearance of Scarlet as a glorified intro, and as they tired 'Gloria' in the 'Boy Songs' slot for a while before scrapping it.

So yeah, I haven't given up on Pop, but we're never going to see a big revival.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Droo on February 10, 2012, 07:40:18 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
barely-a-song appearance of Scarlet as a glorified intro

Says the man who has a reference to Stingray Guitar as his avatar comment.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: The Unknown Caller on February 10, 2012, 08:31:44 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
barely-a-song appearance of Scarlet as a glorified intro

Says the man who has a reference to Stingray Guitar as his avatar comment.

Oh, I would agree that Scarlet and Stingray have about similar status, yes. But I think my quote is a reference to a shout by Bono, not really to the song he was shouting it in. :P
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Midnight is Where the Day Begins on February 10, 2012, 08:34:10 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
barely-a-song appearance of Scarlet as a glorified intro

Says the man who has a reference to Stingray Guitar as his avatar comment.

Oh, I would agree that Scarlet and Stingray have about similar status, yes. But I think my quote is a reference to a shout by Bono, not really to the song he was shouting it in. :P

And the fact that you were lucky enough to be at this concert  ;)
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Droo on February 10, 2012, 08:37:25 PM
I'm really not interested in getting into yet another endless debate with you about Scarlet's status. The fact remains that it is a full track from an actual U2 album that got resurrected quite literally out of nowhere from the indisputably most forgotten U2 album of them all. The fact that is got raised from the dead along with Gloria (which got played on Vertigo more times than Walk On, Angel of Harlem, Kite, and Desire) should not have its significance downplayed as it relates to this topic.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Midnight is Where the Day Begins on February 10, 2012, 09:44:42 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I'm really not interested in getting into yet another endless debate with you about Scarlet's status. The fact remains that it is a full track from an actual U2 album that got resurrected quite literally out of nowhere from the indisputably most forgotten U2 album of them all. The fact that is got raised from the dead along with Gloria (which got played on Vertigo more times than Walk On, Angel of Harlem, Kite, and Desire) should not have its significance downplayed as it relates to this topic.

I'm not going to argue on Scarlet's length, but I think it had everything to do with Aung San Suu Kyi's release from house arrest. The tone of Scarlet, and the lyrics (Reeeeeejoice!) fit perfectly with the situation. Not to mention Bono made mention of it every time the song was played.

Still pleased they brought back an October song. And Gloria was on fire from the few performances from Vertigo that I watched. It should have stayed in the setlist for the whole tour.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Droo on February 10, 2012, 11:12:00 PM
I imagine there's a reason for all older obscure songs that are brought back from the grave, be it a lyric that fits a theme (In A Little While on 360), an overall fit with the theme of the tour (Zooropa), etc. Just because there was a reason behind Scarlet's resurrection doesn't make it any less significant. They could have gone with any number of songs to celebrate her release.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Domenico of Lovetown on February 11, 2012, 04:53:14 AM
They've finally found a place for Stay so that probably eliminated space for an acoustic Staring At The Sun.  I also think they would have an issue playing both SBS and Please in the same set.  Gone seems to be one of their favorites from that era so I wouldn't be shocked if that resurfaces at some point. 

I'm still waiting for a non-acoustic Desire to make a return to the main set for an entire tour.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Jara on February 11, 2012, 06:11:09 AM
POP songs are abound to make a comeback on the next tour. think about it.. U2 have paid homage to all the older material on the last few tours. Pop is next in line.....surely?
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: satellitedog01 on February 11, 2012, 06:50:30 AM
I think it has more to do with the fact that U2 are still around and as big as they are due to the great reception ATYCLB and Bomb have enjoyed in the US, where Pop wasn't received as well. Dark self doubting material wasn't the order of the day from 9/11 on either, so I'm not surprised. I find it apalling to be sure, but not surprising.
And since they seem to be looking at themselves as a US market band first and foremost, I'm not expecting them to resurrect Pop anytime soon. 
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Tumbling Dice on February 11, 2012, 11:50:38 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The fact remains that it is a full track from an actual U2 album that got resurrected quite literally out of nowhere from the indisputably most forgotten U2 album of them all.

Can't argue with that sentence.

Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: spooked1oo on February 11, 2012, 12:31:07 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
POP songs are abound to make a comeback on the next tour. think about it.. U2 have paid homage to all the older material on the last few tours. Pop is next in line.....surely?

The way I see it, there are three albums that can have a comeback on the next tour: Pop, TUF, or Rattle and Hum.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Droo on February 11, 2012, 12:43:55 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The way I see it, there are three albums that can have a comeback on the next tour: Pop, TUF, or Rattle and Hum.

The Unforgettable Fire and Rattle & Ham arguably had their comebacks on 360.

TUF: Pride, The Unforgettable Fire, Bad, MLK. 4 songs from one album ain't too shabby.
R&H: All I Want Is You, Angel Of Harlem, Desire, Love Rescue Me. See above.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: TheSceneoftheAccident on February 11, 2012, 04:06:20 PM
Yeah TUF definitely made its comeback on the 360 Tour. Four regulars from a ten track album from 1984 is not bad at all. Pop is the only album that really needs to come back on the next tour.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Midnight is Where the Day Begins on February 11, 2012, 04:12:26 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Yeah TUF definitely made its comeback on the 360 Tour. Four regulars from a ten track album from 1984 is not bad at all. Pop is the only album that really needs to come back on the next tour.

Not to mention that the 10 track album had short songs like Promenade and 4th of July on it.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Droo on February 11, 2012, 04:31:37 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Yeah TUF definitely made its comeback on the 360 Tour. Four regulars from a ten track album from 1984 is not bad at all. Pop is the only album that really needs to come back on the next tour.

I don't know if I'd classify Bad as a regular. It made fewer appearances than North Star!
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: spooked1oo on February 11, 2012, 04:51:57 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The way I see it, there are three albums that can have a comeback on the next tour: Pop, TUF, or Rattle and Hum.

I was thinking more along the lines of Wire, Promenade (snippet?), Indian Blue Sky, Love Comes Tumbling, Heartland, God Part II, etc.

The Unforgettable Fire and Rattle & Ham arguably had their comebacks on 360.

TUF: Pride, The Unforgettable Fire, Bad, MLK. 4 songs from one album ain't too shabby.
R&H: All I Want Is You, Angel Of Harlem, Desire, Love Rescue Me. See above.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: The Unknown Caller on February 11, 2012, 05:29:31 PM
There were, however, shows at which it was possible to see more TUF than any other album except the one being toured- that's not something that can be said for any other tour since the 80s.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Droo on February 11, 2012, 06:20:59 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
There were, however, shows at which it was possible to see more TUF than any other album except the one being toured- that's not something that can be said for any other tour since the 80s.

Really? Which one? O.o
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: U2-obsessed and proud on February 12, 2012, 02:16:20 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
There were, however, shows at which it was possible to see more TUF than any other album except the one being toured- that's not something that can be said for any other tour since the 80s.

Didn't that happen a few times?  Where TUF was the 2nd highest represented album at a 360 show?
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: 3213dev on February 12, 2012, 04:44:51 AM
http://www.u2gigs.com/show1620.html
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Tumbling Dice on February 12, 2012, 07:01:58 AM
Wouldn't it have been nice if they had made more adventurous selections from TUC, such as Wire, ASOH, Indian Summer Sky and Promenade, instead of the boring predictable choices.

Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: The Unknown Caller on February 12, 2012, 07:32:08 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Wouldn't it have been nice if they had made more adventurous selections from TUC, such as Wire, ASOH, Indian Summer Sky and Promenade, instead of the boring predictable choices.

I had no idea that those were selections from me! :P

Regardless, TUF was probably about as adventurous as ASOH- they were both last played on the Lovetown Tour, IIRC.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Tumbling Dice on February 12, 2012, 07:37:16 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Wouldn't it have been nice if they had made more adventurous selections from TUC, such as Wire, ASOH, Indian Summer Sky and Promenade, instead of the boring predictable choices.

I had no idea that those were selections from me! :P

Regardless, TUF was probably about as adventurous as ASOH- they were both last played on the Lovetown Tour, IIRC.

Yes, and it was a rare night that ASOH was played on that tour.  A rare night, indeed.

Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Droo on February 12, 2012, 11:24:35 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
http://www.u2gigs.com/show1620.html

Wow. And only two songs from Achtung Baby?

I guess they were promoting the Anniversary release of The Unforgettable Fire at that point! 
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: The Unknown Caller on February 12, 2012, 05:41:05 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
http://www.u2gigs.com/show1620.html

Wow. And only two songs from Achtung Baby?

I guess they were promoting the Anniversary release of The Unforgettable Fire at that point!

Yup- and only two from ATYCLB, which also took over the tour around midpoint.

Good gig!  :D
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Tumbling Dice on February 12, 2012, 10:58:44 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
http://www.u2gigs.com/show1620.html

Wow. And only two songs from Achtung Baby?

I guess they were promoting the Anniversary release of The Unforgettable Fire at that point!

Yup- and only two from ATYCLB, which also took over the tour around midpoint.


Yup- around the time 360 became a greatest hits tour.

Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Johnny Feathers on February 13, 2012, 09:43:56 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
At this point, there's no need to "reintroduce" it to audiences if the band themselves weren't happy with it.

Sure.  If they want to, they will.  The original post seemed to suggest some kind of plan to reintroduce Pop material to audiences.  I'm just saying that so far, the band seems to be largely disinclined to do that.  I don't get the sense that Bono is coming up with setlists going, "but we really NEED to get more Pop material in there.  Come on, Edge, Please?  Please, Please?  Or maybe Miami???  Aww..."
We are talking about a band that resurrected TWO songs from October in the last decade.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: U2-obsessed and proud on February 13, 2012, 11:51:00 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
http://www.u2gigs.com/show1620.html

Wow. And only two songs from Achtung Baby?

I guess they were promoting the Anniversary release of The Unforgettable Fire at that point!

http://www.u2gigs.com/show1619.html

http://www.u2gigs.com/show1587.html
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: xy on February 25, 2012, 12:24:03 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
http://www.u2gigs.com/show1620.html

Wow. And only two songs from Achtung Baby?

I guess they were promoting the Anniversary release of The Unforgettable Fire at that point!

Yup- and only two from ATYCLB, which also took over the tour around midpoint.


Yup- around the time 360 became a greatest hits tour.



Yes, with 7 NLOTH songs in the show.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: xy on February 25, 2012, 12:26:01 PM
Pop will make a comeback. It just didn't fit with the political nature of the stage/setlist of Vertigo tour and 360 had NLOTH/new songs before it turned into a Zoo TV 2.0 show.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Kurukira on February 29, 2012, 12:15:54 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Pop will make a comeback. It just didn't fit with the political nature of the stage/setlist of Vertigo tour and 360 had NLOTH/new songs before it turned into a Zoo TV 2.0 show.

I think so too, if there's ever a time to 'remix' Do You Feel Loved ala Even Better, NOW or whenever they have the new album is the time.  I just heard that song today, I think the older version of U2 can handle that now.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: jick on February 29, 2012, 12:41:34 AM
They are saving the POP songs for the next tour.

Cheers,

J
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: markreed on March 07, 2012, 01:12:03 PM
I never understood the absence of "Pop".

PLEASE is one of the finest songs they have ever done. The segue into Streets on Mexico is magical. Dropping MLK/WO and running the set as Sunday/Please/Streets to end the main set? That would've been something. Shunting the encore to MLK/Walk On/One would've been wiser.

Sing the first verse of "DISCOTHEQUE" over the bugnuts drum outro to "Crazy Tonight". It works. It belongs. There. Right there.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: So Cruel on April 03, 2012, 11:20:54 PM
I love Pop but I highly doubt we'll get to see them play much from that album in the future. Maybe 1 song here or there.

U2 has a formula that they stick to. Usually about 22 songs (give or take a few)

5-8 songs from the album they are promoting
12-16 hits/warhorses

This usually only leaves a few songs to choose from out of the hundreds they have written. If we see any Pop songs at all it would probably be at the most 1.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 04, 2012, 07:31:04 AM

Mostly because the band were ashamed of POP - or at least the reaction to it. I think it's a great album and loved POPMART.

I guarantee the same will apply to NLOTH - very few (if any) songs will be played on future tours from NLOTH because it's crap and the public reaction to it wasn't great and the single tanked. In fact they dropped most of the songs from NLOTH for 360 meaning the tour became a Greatest Hits Tour. At least with POPMART they stuck to their guns and played a significant number of songs from the album throughout.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: markreed on April 07, 2012, 12:08:43 PM
Well, if 360 had been done & dusted by May 2010 without a break, you might be right, but considering by the time Leg 3 started, the album was 18 months old, no wonder they didn't play their usual 7 songs from it by then : the record hadn't been played live for 10 months, and the last single was also 10 months old at that point. 360 Legs 3-7 didn't have an album to promote.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 07, 2012, 02:12:37 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Well, if 360 had been done & dusted by May 2010 without a break, you might be right, but considering by the time Leg 3 started, the album was 18 months old, no wonder they didn't play their usual 7 songs from it by then : the record hadn't been played live for 10 months, and the last single was also 10 months old at that point. 360 Legs 3-7 didn't have an album to promote.

I hear ya - but the following lead me to believe the never intended 360 to tour NLOTH:

1) the stage concept (ie a stupidly ugly metal claw) had nothing to do with NLOTH visually
2) the name 360 had nothing to do with any of the concepts on NLOTH
3) they very quickly dropped lots of songs from the album. I can't think of a tour in recent memory when they DIDN'T play a song from the album they were touring as their opening tune. Witness Beauftil Day or rubbish instrumental Stingray replacing any cut from NLOTH.
4) NLOTH is a really poor record
5) Boots is probably the worst single they have ever released
6) bonos sunglasses
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Droo on April 07, 2012, 03:09:59 PM
Yes, we all get that you don't like NLOTH. Change the channel. This show is getting old.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: markreed on April 09, 2012, 11:18:38 AM
What he said!
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: DGordon1 on April 14, 2012, 05:10:11 PM
He's a wind up merchant.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: spooked1oo on April 14, 2012, 07:33:07 PM
I want Mofo. Just saying.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: mattressjedi on April 14, 2012, 07:35:05 PM
They haven't played anything from POP since the Elevation tour because NLOTH was a bad album and they decided to play arenas/stadiums for Vertigo and stadiums only for 360.
Can't believe you can't see this!

 :P
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: tigerfan41 on April 14, 2012, 11:20:56 PM
I'm not sure why they don't just extend the setlist to 3 hours and include some of the songs people have been asking for. I'd love to hear a couple songs from Pop at least....and at least a few from NLOTH. If Springsteen, McCartney and even the Foo Fighters can do the 3 hour setlist, why can't U2?
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: singnomore on April 15, 2012, 12:08:12 AM
I guess its simply as perfectionists they know they didn't finish the album sound the way they wanted. That's what sticks in their minds and makes playing any songs a harder decision for them.

Who knows in the next arena tour which will be b-sides and rarities - who knows!
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: spooked1oo on April 15, 2012, 12:53:01 AM
Am I the only person who kind of hopes U2 goes with releasing the "dance album" first, just so that they naturally play more Pop on the tour?
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: markreed on April 15, 2012, 03:41:07 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
They haven't played anything from POP since the Elevation tour because NLOTH was a bad album and they decided to play arenas/stadiums for Vertigo and stadiums only for 360.
Can't believe you can't see this!

 :P

.... because NLOTH is not a bad album. It's the best U2 record since 1997. But then, I like bands that don't try and stuff their albums full of pop hits but just try to make the best records they can. NLOTH just doesn't fit into your idea of what a good U2 record should be but fits into what U2's idea of what a good record should be.

Why can't U2 do a three hour setlist? The longest show on the 360 tour was 2hrs 37mins. That's a good length. Not everyone can play drums for three hundred hours on tour, or sing for three hours a night. That is damn hard work.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: spooked1oo on April 15, 2012, 03:49:50 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 anything from POP since the Elevation tour because NLOTH was a bad album and they decided to play arenas/stadiums for Vertigo and stadiums only for 360.
Can't believe you can't see this!

 :P

.... because NLOTH is not a bad album. It's the best U2 record since 1997. But then, I like bands that don't try and stuff their albums full of pop hits but just try to make the best records they can. NLOTH just doesn't fit into your idea of what a good U2 record should be but fits into what U2's idea of what a good record should be.

Why can't U2 do a three hour setlist? The longest show on the 360 tour was 2hrs 37mins. That's a good length. Not everyone can play drums for three hundred hours on tour, or sing for three hours a night. That is damn hard work.

First off, ATYCLB was better than No Line (in my opinion). Second, I don't think anybody on U2 would have much trouble playing three-hour setlists except Bono; in his old(ish) age his voice needs to stay fresh every night. As a drummer, I can honestly say that Larry's playing isn't exactly exhausting.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: mattressjedi on April 15, 2012, 04:29:16 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 anything from POP since the Elevation tour because NLOTH was a bad album and they decided to play arenas/stadiums for Vertigo and stadiums only for 360.
Can't believe you can't see this!

 :P

.... because NLOTH is not a bad album. It's the best U2 record since 1997. But then, I like bands that don't try and stuff their albums full of pop hits but just try to make the best records they can. NLOTH just doesn't fit into your idea of what a good U2 record should be but fits into what U2's idea of what a good record should be.

Why can't U2 do a three hour setlist? The longest show on the 360 tour was 2hrs 37mins. That's a good length. Not everyone can play drums for three hundred hours on tour, or sing for three hours a night. That is damn hard work.

Sorry but that was sarcasm mark. ;)
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: tigerfan41 on April 15, 2012, 09:34:03 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 anything from POP since the Elevation tour because NLOTH was a bad album and they decided to play arenas/stadiums for Vertigo and stadiums only for 360.
Can't believe you can't see this!

 :P

.... because NLOTH is not a bad album. It's the best U2 record since 1997. But then, I like bands that don't try and stuff their albums full of pop hits but just try to make the best records they can. NLOTH just doesn't fit into your idea of what a good U2 record should be but fits into what U2's idea of what a good record should be.

Why can't U2 do a three hour setlist? The longest show on the 360 tour was 2hrs 37mins. That's a good length. Not everyone can play drums for three hundred hours on tour, or sing for three hours a night. That is damn hard work.

First off, ATYCLB was better than No Line (in my opinion). Second, I don't think anybody on U2 would have much trouble playing three-hour setlists except Bono; in his old(ish) age his voice needs to stay fresh every night. As a drummer, I can honestly say that Larry's playing isn't exactly exhausting.

Springsteen's 10 years older than Bono and he still sounds good....and he plays 3 hour sets. Same thing with McCartney and he's 70. It can be done with the right amount of coaching and care for the voice. Now if Bono had gone crazy with the drugs like many other singers, he might not be able to do it.....but the fact that he still sounds pretty good today (aside from the occasional off note) seems to indicate that they could do 3 hour sets easily. And it honestly surprises me that they don't. They could easily do 30 songs and people would not get bored. It'd allow them to cover stuff from their new CD (even if it's not a smashing success) plus stuff from their other CDs in addition to the greatest hits.

I don't know if Bono takes voice lessons, but if he doesn't, might be something work starting on. Even in the best singers it can make a tremendous difference in terms of control and longevity.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: spooked1oo on April 15, 2012, 11:00:45 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 anything from POP since the Elevation tour because NLOTH was a bad album and they decided to play arenas/stadiums for Vertigo and stadiums only for 360.
Can't believe you can't see this!

 :P

.... because NLOTH is not a bad album. It's the best U2 record since 1997. But then, I like bands that don't try and stuff their albums full of pop hits but just try to make the best records they can. NLOTH just doesn't fit into your idea of what a good U2 record should be but fits into what U2's idea of what a good record should be.

Why can't U2 do a three hour setlist? The longest show on the 360 tour was 2hrs 37mins. That's a good length. Not everyone can play drums for three hundred hours on tour, or sing for three hours a night. That is damn hard work.

First off, ATYCLB was better than No Line (in my opinion). Second, I don't think anybody on U2 would have much trouble playing three-hour setlists except Bono; in his old(ish) age his voice needs to stay fresh every night. As a drummer, I can honestly say that Larry's playing isn't exactly exhausting.

Springsteen's 10 years older than Bono and he still sounds good....and he plays 3 hour sets. Same thing with McCartney and he's 70. It can be done with the right amount of coaching and care for the voice. Now if Bono had gone crazy with the drugs like many other singers, he might not be able to do it.....but the fact that he still sounds pretty good today (aside from the occasional off note) seems to indicate that they could do 3 hour sets easily. And it honestly surprises me that they don't. They could easily do 30 songs and people would not get bored. It'd allow them to cover stuff from their new CD (even if it's not a smashing success) plus stuff from their other CDs in addition to the greatest hits.

I don't know if Bono takes voice lessons, but if he doesn't, might be something work starting on. Even in the best singers it can make a tremendous difference in terms of control and longevity.

Yeah, but I don't see Springsteen or McCartney doing falsettos and other vocal tricks as often or as well as Bono. If Bono just sang Elevation, Beautiful Day, SBS, and Vertigo for three hours I think he'd be perfectly fine, but if you throw in Bad, The Unforgettable Fire, Miss Sarajevo, and Please in there you might end up with a little bit of a warn-down voice the next night.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: markreed on April 16, 2012, 04:29:17 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
They haven't played anything from POP since the Elevation tour because NLOTH was a bad album and they decided to play arenas/stadiums for Vertigo and stadiums only for 360.
Can't believe you can't see this!

 :P

.... because NLOTH is not a bad album. It's the best U2 record since 1997. But then, I like bands that don't try and stuff their albums full of pop hits but just try to make the best records they can. NLOTH just doesn't fit into your idea of what a good U2 record should be but fits into what U2's idea of what a good record should be.

Why can't U2 do a three hour setlist? The longest show on the 360 tour was 2hrs 37mins. That's a good length. Not everyone can play drums for three hundred hours on tour, or sing for three hours a night. That is damn hard work.

Sorry but that was sarcasm mark. ;)

Blast, I lost my sense of humour beneath that huge Joshua Tree and Cowboy Hat. :P
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: tigerfan41 on April 16, 2012, 09:35:37 AM
True, but with proper coaching/care, Bono should be able to do it without any issues. Or simply change some of the arrangements to not involve so much falsetto.

Also, it's highly unlikely that they'll play every night, especially if they do another stadium tour. So with 2-3 days rest each time, it's enough time to let the voice recover.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 16, 2012, 10:17:09 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 are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
They haven't played anything from POP since the Elevation tour because NLOTH was a bad album and they decided to play arenas/stadiums for Vertigo and stadiums only for 360.
Can't believe you can't see this!

 :P

.... because NLOTH is not a bad album. It's the best U2 record since 1997. But then, I like bands that don't try and stuff their albums full of pop hits but just try to make the best records they can. NLOTH just doesn't fit into your idea of what a good U2 record should be but fits into what U2's idea of what a good record should be.

Why can't U2 do a three hour setlist? The longest show on the 360 tour was 2hrs 37mins. That's a good length. Not everyone can play drums for three hundred hours on tour, or sing for three hours a night. That is damn hard work.

First off, ATYCLB was better than No Line (in my opinion). Second, I don't think anybody on U2 would have much trouble playing three-hour setlists except Bono; in his old(ish) age his voice needs to stay fresh every night. As a drummer, I can honestly say that Larry's playing isn't exactly exhausting.

Springsteen's 10 years older than Bono and he still sounds good....and he plays 3 hour sets. Same thing with McCartney and he's 70. It can be done with the right amount of coaching and care for the voice. Now if Bono had gone crazy with the drugs like many other singers, he might not be able to do it.....but the fact that he still sounds pretty good today (aside from the occasional off note) seems to indicate that they could do 3 hour sets easily. And it honestly surprises me that they don't. They could easily do 30 songs and people would not get bored. It'd allow them to cover stuff from their new CD (even if it's not a smashing success) plus stuff from their other CDs in addition to the greatest hits.

I don't know if Bono takes voice lessons, but if he doesn't, might be something work starting on. Even in the best singers it can make a tremendous difference in terms of control and longevity.

Yeah, but I don't see Springsteen or McCartney doing falsettos and other vocal tricks as often or as well as Bono. If Bono just sang Elevation, Beautiful Day, SBS, and Vertigo for three hours I think he'd be perfectly fine, but if you throw in Bad, The Unforgettable Fire, Miss Sarajevo, and Please in there you might end up with a little bit of a warn-down voice the next night.

Falsetto is actually a lot easier on the male vocal chords than normal singing. You can hear bono singing falsetto deliberately on some of the songs where he just can't reach the notes any more for example Pride or Bad.

As they stand songs like Bad, TUF and Please have no falsetto at all. Bono adds it when he can't reach the notes using his normal singing voice
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 16, 2012, 11:27:00 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 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 anything from POP since the Elevation tour because NLOTH was a bad album and they decided to play arenas/stadiums for Vertigo and stadiums only for 360.
Can't believe you can't see this!

 :P

.... because NLOTH is not a bad album. It's the best U2 record since 1997. But then, I like bands that don't try and stuff their albums full of pop hits but just try to make the best records they can. NLOTH just doesn't fit into your idea of what a good U2 record should be but fits into what U2's idea of what a good record should be.

Why can't U2 do a three hour setlist? The longest show on the 360 tour was 2hrs 37mins. That's a good length. Not everyone can play drums for three hundred hours on tour, or sing for three hours a night. That is damn hard work.

First off, ATYCLB was better than No Line (in my opinion). Second, I don't think anybody on U2 would have much trouble playing three-hour setlists except Bono; in his old(ish) age his voice needs to stay fresh every night. As a drummer, I can honestly say that Larry's playing isn't exactly exhausting.

Springsteen's 10 years older than Bono and he still sounds good....and he plays 3 hour sets. Same thing with McCartney and he's 70. It can be done with the right amount of coaching and care for the voice. Now if Bono had gone crazy with the drugs like many other singers, he might not be able to do it.....but the fact that he still sounds pretty good today (aside from the occasional off note) seems to indicate that they could do 3 hour sets easily. And it honestly surprises me that they don't. They could easily do 30 songs and people would not get bored. It'd allow them to cover stuff from their new CD (even if it's not a smashing success) plus stuff from their other CDs in addition to the greatest hits.

I don't know if Bono takes voice lessons, but if he doesn't, might be something work starting on. Even in the best singers it can make a tremendous difference in terms of control and longevity.

Yeah, but I don't see Springsteen or McCartney doing falsettos and other vocal tricks as often or as well as Bono. If Bono just sang Elevation, Beautiful Day, SBS, and Vertigo for three hours I think he'd be perfectly fine, but if you throw in Bad, The Unforgettable Fire, Miss Sarajevo, and Please in there you might end up with a little bit of a warn-down voice the next night.

Falsetto is actually a lot easier on the male vocal chords than normal singing. You can hear bono singing falsetto deliberately on some of the songs where he just can't reach the notes any more for example Pride or Bad.

As they stand songs like Bad, TUF and Please have no falsetto at all. Bono adds it when he can't reach the notes using his normal singing voice

Springsteen has a very average voice and not much vocal range.  Where as Bono sings the opera.

Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: spooked1oo on April 16, 2012, 03:58:37 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
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
They haven't played anything from POP since the Elevation tour because NLOTH was a bad album and they decided to play arenas/stadiums for Vertigo and stadiums only for 360.
Can't believe you can't see this!

 :P

.... because NLOTH is not a bad album. It's the best U2 record since 1997. But then, I like bands that don't try and stuff their albums full of pop hits but just try to make the best records they can. NLOTH just doesn't fit into your idea of what a good U2 record should be but fits into what U2's idea of what a good record should be.

Why can't U2 do a three hour setlist? The longest show on the 360 tour was 2hrs 37mins. That's a good length. Not everyone can play drums for three hundred hours on tour, or sing for three hours a night. That is damn hard work.

First off, ATYCLB was better than No Line (in my opinion). Second, I don't think anybody on U2 would have much trouble playing three-hour setlists except Bono; in his old(ish) age his voice needs to stay fresh every night. As a drummer, I can honestly say that Larry's playing isn't exactly exhausting.

Springsteen's 10 years older than Bono and he still sounds good....and he plays 3 hour sets. Same thing with McCartney and he's 70. It can be done with the right amount of coaching and care for the voice. Now if Bono had gone crazy with the drugs like many other singers, he might not be able to do it.....but the fact that he still sounds pretty good today (aside from the occasional off note) seems to indicate that they could do 3 hour sets easily. And it honestly surprises me that they don't. They could easily do 30 songs and people would not get bored. It'd allow them to cover stuff from their new CD (even if it's not a smashing success) plus stuff from their other CDs in addition to the greatest hits.

I don't know if Bono takes voice lessons, but if he doesn't, might be something work starting on. Even in the best singers it can make a tremendous difference in terms of control and longevity.

Yeah, but I don't see Springsteen or McCartney doing falsettos and other vocal tricks as often or as well as Bono. If Bono just sang Elevation, Beautiful Day, SBS, and Vertigo for three hours I think he'd be perfectly fine, but if you throw in Bad, The Unforgettable Fire, Miss Sarajevo, and Please in there you might end up with a little bit of a warn-down voice the next night.

Falsetto is actually a lot easier on the male vocal chords than normal singing. You can hear bono singing falsetto deliberately on some of the songs where he just can't reach the notes any more for example Pride or Bad.

As they stand songs like Bad, TUF and Please have no falsetto at all. Bono adds it when he can't reach the notes using his normal singing voice

Springsteen has a very average voice and not much vocal range.  Where as Bono sings the opera.



^Agreed

 But I still think the "wide awake"s and the "in the name of love"s would kill his voice after a while. True, he could find a way out of them, like having the crowd sing instead, but I wouldn't enjoy that as much.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 17, 2012, 05:55:10 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 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 anything from POP since the Elevation tour because NLOTH was a bad album and they decided to play arenas/stadiums for Vertigo and stadiums only for 360.
Can't believe you can't see this!

 :P

.... because NLOTH is not a bad album. It's the best U2 record since 1997. But then, I like bands that don't try and stuff their albums full of pop hits but just try to make the best records they can. NLOTH just doesn't fit into your idea of what a good U2 record should be but fits into what U2's idea of what a good record should be.

Why can't U2 do a three hour setlist? The longest show on the 360 tour was 2hrs 37mins. That's a good length. Not everyone can play drums for three hundred hours on tour, or sing for three hours a night. That is damn hard work.

First off, ATYCLB was better than No Line (in my opinion). Second, I don't think anybody on U2 would have much trouble playing three-hour setlists except Bono; in his old(ish) age his voice needs to stay fresh every night. As a drummer, I can honestly say that Larry's playing isn't exactly exhausting.

Springsteen's 10 years older than Bono and he still sounds good....and he plays 3 hour sets. Same thing with McCartney and he's 70. It can be done with the right amount of coaching and care for the voice. Now if Bono had gone crazy with the drugs like many other singers, he might not be able to do it.....but the fact that he still sounds pretty good today (aside from the occasional off note) seems to indicate that they could do 3 hour sets easily. And it honestly surprises me that they don't. They could easily do 30 songs and people would not get bored. It'd allow them to cover stuff from their new CD (even if it's not a smashing success) plus stuff from their other CDs in addition to the greatest hits.

I don't know if Bono takes voice lessons, but if he doesn't, might be something work starting on. Even in the best singers it can make a tremendous difference in terms of control and longevity.

Yeah, but I don't see Springsteen or McCartney doing falsettos and other vocal tricks as often or as well as Bono. If Bono just sang Elevation, Beautiful Day, SBS, and Vertigo for three hours I think he'd be perfectly fine, but if you throw in Bad, The Unforgettable Fire, Miss Sarajevo, and Please in there you might end up with a little bit of a warn-down voice the next night.

Falsetto is actually a lot easier on the male vocal chords than normal singing. You can hear bono singing falsetto deliberately on some of the songs where he just can't reach the notes any more for example Pride or Bad.

As they stand songs like Bad, TUF and Please have no falsetto at all. Bono adds it when he can't reach the notes using his normal singing voice

Springsteen has a very average voice and not much vocal range.  Where as Bono sings the opera.

It's those tight trousers again
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Droo on April 17, 2012, 06:24:36 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

As they stand songs like Bad, TUF and Please have no falsetto at all. Bono adds it when he can't reach the notes using his normal singing voice

Bad the album version has falsetto. Listen to it again.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 17, 2012, 06:48:34 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

As they stand songs like Bad, TUF and Please have no falsetto at all. Bono adds it when he can't reach the notes using his normal singing voice

Bad the album version has falsetto. Listen to it again.

97% of Bad isn't falsetto - only the ohh ohh's are.

When he sings Bad these days he often sings the 'I'm wide awake' part falsetto as he can't hit the notes anymore.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Droo on April 17, 2012, 07:14:52 AM
When you sing in the stratosphere for years and years a voice tends to wear down. Look at Mariah Carey. That kind of singing takes a lot out of a person. I'd like to see you sing like Bono for over 30 years.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: satellitedog01 on April 17, 2012, 08:17:37 AM
The only falsetto singing in the album version of Bad I hear are the whoo-ho-s.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 17, 2012, 08:22:00 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
When you sing in the stratosphere for years and years a voice tends to wear down. Look at Mariah Carey. That kind of singing takes a lot out of a person. I'd like to see you sing like Bono for over 30 years.

Young man, no need to be defensive. I'm not critising bono's voice - I'm saying it's weaker now so he has to sing falsetto sometimes.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: mattressjedi on April 17, 2012, 01:01:37 PM
I like his raspy, older voice in MOS. It's not Rod Stewart bad yet. It still has character.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 17, 2012, 02:02:52 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
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 anything from POP since the Elevation tour because NLOTH was a bad album and they decided to play arenas/stadiums for Vertigo and stadiums only for 360.
Can't believe you can't see this!

 :P

.... because NLOTH is not a bad album. It's the best U2 record since 1997. But then, I like bands that don't try and stuff their albums full of pop hits but just try to make the best records they can. NLOTH just doesn't fit into your idea of what a good U2 record should be but fits into what U2's idea of what a good record should be.

Why can't U2 do a three hour setlist? The longest show on the 360 tour was 2hrs 37mins. That's a good length. Not everyone can play drums for three hundred hours on tour, or sing for three hours a night. That is damn hard work.

First off, ATYCLB was better than No Line (in my opinion). Second, I don't think anybody on U2 would have much trouble playing three-hour setlists except Bono; in his old(ish) age his voice needs to stay fresh every night. As a drummer, I can honestly say that Larry's playing isn't exactly exhausting.

Springsteen's 10 years older than Bono and he still sounds good....and he plays 3 hour sets. Same thing with McCartney and he's 70. It can be done with the right amount of coaching and care for the voice. Now if Bono had gone crazy with the drugs like many other singers, he might not be able to do it.....but the fact that he still sounds pretty good today (aside from the occasional off note) seems to indicate that they could do 3 hour sets easily. And it honestly surprises me that they don't. They could easily do 30 songs and people would not get bored. It'd allow them to cover stuff from their new CD (even if it's not a smashing success) plus stuff from their other CDs in addition to the greatest hits.

I don't know if Bono takes voice lessons, but if he doesn't, might be something work starting on. Even in the best singers it can make a tremendous difference in terms of control and longevity.

Yeah, but I don't see Springsteen or McCartney doing falsettos and other vocal tricks as often or as well as Bono. If Bono just sang Elevation, Beautiful Day, SBS, and Vertigo for three hours I think he'd be perfectly fine, but if you throw in Bad, The Unforgettable Fire, Miss Sarajevo, and Please in there you might end up with a little bit of a warn-down voice the next night.

Falsetto is actually a lot easier on the male vocal chords than normal singing. You can hear bono singing falsetto deliberately on some of the songs where he just can't reach the notes any more for example Pride or Bad.

As they stand songs like Bad, TUF and Please have no falsetto at all. Bono adds it when he can't reach the notes using his normal singing voice

Springsteen has a very average voice and not much vocal range.  Where as Bono sings the opera.

It's those tight trousers again

I bet you can't take your eyes of 'em, can you Dreamlover?

Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 17, 2012, 03:02:43 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
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 anything from POP since the Elevation tour because NLOTH was a bad album and they decided to play arenas/stadiums for Vertigo and stadiums only for 360.
Can't believe you can't see this!

 :P

.... because NLOTH is not a bad album. It's the best U2 record since 1997. But then, I like bands that don't try and stuff their albums full of pop hits but just try to make the best records they can. NLOTH just doesn't fit into your idea of what a good U2 record should be but fits into what U2's idea of what a good record should be.

Why can't U2 do a three hour setlist? The longest show on the 360 tour was 2hrs 37mins. That's a good length. Not everyone can play drums for three hundred hours on tour, or sing for three hours a night. That is damn hard work.

First off, ATYCLB was better than No Line (in my opinion). Second, I don't think anybody on U2 would have much trouble playing three-hour setlists except Bono; in his old(ish) age his voice needs to stay fresh every night. As a drummer, I can honestly say that Larry's playing isn't exactly exhausting.

Springsteen's 10 years older than Bono and he still sounds good....and he plays 3 hour sets. Same thing with McCartney and he's 70. It can be done with the right amount of coaching and care for the voice. Now if Bono had gone crazy with the drugs like many other singers, he might not be able to do it.....but the fact that he still sounds pretty good today (aside from the occasional off note) seems to indicate that they could do 3 hour sets easily. And it honestly surprises me that they don't. They could easily do 30 songs and people would not get bored. It'd allow them to cover stuff from their new CD (even if it's not a smashing success) plus stuff from their other CDs in addition to the greatest hits.

I don't know if Bono takes voice lessons, but if he doesn't, might be something work starting on. Even in the best singers it can make a tremendous difference in terms of control and longevity.

Yeah, but I don't see Springsteen or McCartney doing falsettos and other vocal tricks as often or as well as Bono. If Bono just sang Elevation, Beautiful Day, SBS, and Vertigo for three hours I think he'd be perfectly fine, but if you throw in Bad, The Unforgettable Fire, Miss Sarajevo, and Please in there you might end up with a little bit of a warn-down voice the next night.

Falsetto is actually a lot easier on the male vocal chords than normal singing. You can hear bono singing falsetto deliberately on some of the songs where he just can't reach the notes any more for example Pride or Bad.

As they stand songs like Bad, TUF and Please have no falsetto at all. Bono adds it when he can't reach the notes using his normal singing voice

Springsteen has a very average voice and not much vocal range.  Where as Bono sings the opera.

It's those tight trousers again

I bet you can't take your eyes of 'em, can you Dreamlover?

Who wouldn't be aroused by a short Irish man in tight leather trousers with a sock stuffed down the front
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 17, 2012, 03:04:45 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
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
They haven't played anything from POP since the Elevation tour because NLOTH was a bad album and they decided to play arenas/stadiums for Vertigo and stadiums only for 360.
Can't believe you can't see this!

 :P

.... because NLOTH is not a bad album. It's the best U2 record since 1997. But then, I like bands that don't try and stuff their albums full of pop hits but just try to make the best records they can. NLOTH just doesn't fit into your idea of what a good U2 record should be but fits into what U2's idea of what a good record should be.

Why can't U2 do a three hour setlist? The longest show on the 360 tour was 2hrs 37mins. That's a good length. Not everyone can play drums for three hundred hours on tour, or sing for three hours a night. That is damn hard work.

First off, ATYCLB was better than No Line (in my opinion). Second, I don't think anybody on U2 would have much trouble playing three-hour setlists except Bono; in his old(ish) age his voice needs to stay fresh every night. As a drummer, I can honestly say that Larry's playing isn't exactly exhausting.

Springsteen's 10 years older than Bono and he still sounds good....and he plays 3 hour sets. Same thing with McCartney and he's 70. It can be done with the right amount of coaching and care for the voice. Now if Bono had gone crazy with the drugs like many other singers, he might not be able to do it.....but the fact that he still sounds pretty good today (aside from the occasional off note) seems to indicate that they could do 3 hour sets easily. And it honestly surprises me that they don't. They could easily do 30 songs and people would not get bored. It'd allow them to cover stuff from their new CD (even if it's not a smashing success) plus stuff from their other CDs in addition to the greatest hits.

I don't know if Bono takes voice lessons, but if he doesn't, might be something work starting on. Even in the best singers it can make a tremendous difference in terms of control and longevity.

Yeah, but I don't see Springsteen or McCartney doing falsettos and other vocal tricks as often or as well as Bono. If Bono just sang Elevation, Beautiful Day, SBS, and Vertigo for three hours I think he'd be perfectly fine, but if you throw in Bad, The Unforgettable Fire, Miss Sarajevo, and Please in there you might end up with a little bit of a warn-down voice the next night.

Falsetto is actually a lot easier on the male vocal chords than normal singing. You can hear bono singing falsetto deliberately on some of the songs where he just can't reach the notes any more for example Pride or Bad.

As they stand songs like Bad, TUF and Please have no falsetto at all. Bono adds it when he can't reach the notes using his normal singing voice

Springsteen has a very average voice and not much vocal range.  Where as Bono sings the opera.

It's those tight trousers again

I bet you can't take your eyes of 'em, can you Dreamlover?

Who wouldn't be aroused by a short Irish man in tight leather trousers with a sock stuffed down the front

That's not a sock; there's a reason why the B-man is a tenor.

Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 17, 2012, 03:06:40 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
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
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
They haven't played anything from POP since the Elevation tour because NLOTH was a bad album and they decided to play arenas/stadiums for Vertigo and stadiums only for 360.
Can't believe you can't see this!

 :P

.... because NLOTH is not a bad album. It's the best U2 record since 1997. But then, I like bands that don't try and stuff their albums full of pop hits but just try to make the best records they can. NLOTH just doesn't fit into your idea of what a good U2 record should be but fits into what U2's idea of what a good record should be.

Why can't U2 do a three hour setlist? The longest show on the 360 tour was 2hrs 37mins. That's a good length. Not everyone can play drums for three hundred hours on tour, or sing for three hours a night. That is damn hard work.

First off, ATYCLB was better than No Line (in my opinion). Second, I don't think anybody on U2 would have much trouble playing three-hour setlists except Bono; in his old(ish) age his voice needs to stay fresh every night. As a drummer, I can honestly say that Larry's playing isn't exactly exhausting.

Springsteen's 10 years older than Bono and he still sounds good....and he plays 3 hour sets. Same thing with McCartney and he's 70. It can be done with the right amount of coaching and care for the voice. Now if Bono had gone crazy with the drugs like many other singers, he might not be able to do it.....but the fact that he still sounds pretty good today (aside from the occasional off note) seems to indicate that they could do 3 hour sets easily. And it honestly surprises me that they don't. They could easily do 30 songs and people would not get bored. It'd allow them to cover stuff from their new CD (even if it's not a smashing success) plus stuff from their other CDs in addition to the greatest hits.

I don't know if Bono takes voice lessons, but if he doesn't, might be something work starting on. Even in the best singers it can make a tremendous difference in terms of control and longevity.

Yeah, but I don't see Springsteen or McCartney doing falsettos and other vocal tricks as often or as well as Bono. If Bono just sang Elevation, Beautiful Day, SBS, and Vertigo for three hours I think he'd be perfectly fine, but if you throw in Bad, The Unforgettable Fire, Miss Sarajevo, and Please in there you might end up with a little bit of a warn-down voice the next night.

Falsetto is actually a lot easier on the male vocal chords than normal singing. You can hear bono singing falsetto deliberately on some of the songs where he just can't reach the notes any more for example Pride or Bad.

As they stand songs like Bad, TUF and Please have no falsetto at all. Bono adds it when he can't reach the notes using his normal singing voice

Springsteen has a very average voice and not much vocal range.  Where as Bono sings the opera.

It's those tight trousers again

I bet you can't take your eyes of 'em, can you Dreamlover?

Who wouldn't be aroused by a short Irish man in tight leather trousers with a sock stuffed down the front

That's not a sock; there's a reason why the B-man is a tenor.

Is it a cucumber?
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 17, 2012, 03:09:21 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
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
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
They haven't played anything from POP since the Elevation tour because NLOTH was a bad album and they decided to play arenas/stadiums for Vertigo and stadiums only for 360.
Can't believe you can't see this!

 :P

.... because NLOTH is not a bad album. It's the best U2 record since 1997. But then, I like bands that don't try and stuff their albums full of pop hits but just try to make the best records they can. NLOTH just doesn't fit into your idea of what a good U2 record should be but fits into what U2's idea of what a good record should be.

Why can't U2 do a three hour setlist? The longest show on the 360 tour was 2hrs 37mins. That's a good length. Not everyone can play drums for three hundred hours on tour, or sing for three hours a night. That is damn hard work.

First off, ATYCLB was better than No Line (in my opinion). Second, I don't think anybody on U2 would have much trouble playing three-hour setlists except Bono; in his old(ish) age his voice needs to stay fresh every night. As a drummer, I can honestly say that Larry's playing isn't exactly exhausting.

Springsteen's 10 years older than Bono and he still sounds good....and he plays 3 hour sets. Same thing with McCartney and he's 70. It can be done with the right amount of coaching and care for the voice. Now if Bono had gone crazy with the drugs like many other singers, he might not be able to do it.....but the fact that he still sounds pretty good today (aside from the occasional off note) seems to indicate that they could do 3 hour sets easily. And it honestly surprises me that they don't. They could easily do 30 songs and people would not get bored. It'd allow them to cover stuff from their new CD (even if it's not a smashing success) plus stuff from their other CDs in addition to the greatest hits.

I don't know if Bono takes voice lessons, but if he doesn't, might be something work starting on. Even in the best singers it can make a tremendous difference in terms of control and longevity.

Yeah, but I don't see Springsteen or McCartney doing falsettos and other vocal tricks as often or as well as Bono. If Bono just sang Elevation, Beautiful Day, SBS, and Vertigo for three hours I think he'd be perfectly fine, but if you throw in Bad, The Unforgettable Fire, Miss Sarajevo, and Please in there you might end up with a little bit of a warn-down voice the next night.

Falsetto is actually a lot easier on the male vocal chords than normal singing. You can hear bono singing falsetto deliberately on some of the songs where he just can't reach the notes any more for example Pride or Bad.

As they stand songs like Bad, TUF and Please have no falsetto at all. Bono adds it when he can't reach the notes using his normal singing voice

Springsteen has a very average voice and not much vocal range.  Where as Bono sings the opera.

It's those tight trousers again

I bet you can't take your eyes of 'em, can you Dreamlover?

Who wouldn't be aroused by a short Irish man in tight leather trousers with a sock stuffed down the front

That's not a sock; there's a reason why the B-man is a tenor.

Is it a cucumber?

I'm sorry, Dreamlover, I can't help you.

Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 17, 2012, 03:19:58 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
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
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 anything from POP since the Elevation tour because NLOTH was a bad album and they decided to play arenas/stadiums for Vertigo and stadiums only for 360.
Can't believe you can't see this!

 :P

.... because NLOTH is not a bad album. It's the best U2 record since 1997. But then, I like bands that don't try and stuff their albums full of pop hits but just try to make the best records they can. NLOTH just doesn't fit into your idea of what a good U2 record should be but fits into what U2's idea of what a good record should be.

Why can't U2 do a three hour setlist? The longest show on the 360 tour was 2hrs 37mins. That's a good length. Not everyone can play drums for three hundred hours on tour, or sing for three hours a night. That is damn hard work.

First off, ATYCLB was better than No Line (in my opinion). Second, I don't think anybody on U2 would have much trouble playing three-hour setlists except Bono; in his old(ish) age his voice needs to stay fresh every night. As a drummer, I can honestly say that Larry's playing isn't exactly exhausting.

Springsteen's 10 years older than Bono and he still sounds good....and he plays 3 hour sets. Same thing with McCartney and he's 70. It can be done with the right amount of coaching and care for the voice. Now if Bono had gone crazy with the drugs like many other singers, he might not be able to do it.....but the fact that he still sounds pretty good today (aside from the occasional off note) seems to indicate that they could do 3 hour sets easily. And it honestly surprises me that they don't. They could easily do 30 songs and people would not get bored. It'd allow them to cover stuff from their new CD (even if it's not a smashing success) plus stuff from their other CDs in addition to the greatest hits.

I don't know if Bono takes voice lessons, but if he doesn't, might be something work starting on. Even in the best singers it can make a tremendous difference in terms of control and longevity.

Yeah, but I don't see Springsteen or McCartney doing falsettos and other vocal tricks as often or as well as Bono. If Bono just sang Elevation, Beautiful Day, SBS, and Vertigo for three hours I think he'd be perfectly fine, but if you throw in Bad, The Unforgettable Fire, Miss Sarajevo, and Please in there you might end up with a little bit of a warn-down voice the next night.

Falsetto is actually a lot easier on the male vocal chords than normal singing. You can hear bono singing falsetto deliberately on some of the songs where he just can't reach the notes any more for example Pride or Bad.

As they stand songs like Bad, TUF and Please have no falsetto at all. Bono adds it when he can't reach the notes using his normal singing voice

Springsteen has a very average voice and not much vocal range.  Where as Bono sings the opera.

It's those tight trousers again

I bet you can't take your eyes of 'em, can you Dreamlover?

Who wouldn't be aroused by a short Irish man in tight leather trousers with a sock stuffed down the front

That's not a sock; there's a reason why the B-man is a tenor.

Is it a cucumber?

I'm sorry, Dreamlover, I can't help you.

Then get yourself to muddymatches.co.uk
It's a dating site for farmers
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 17, 2012, 05:38:53 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
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
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 anything from POP since the Elevation tour because NLOTH was a bad album and they decided to play arenas/stadiums for Vertigo and stadiums only for 360.
Can't believe you can't see this!

 :P

.... because NLOTH is not a bad album. It's the best U2 record since 1997. But then, I like bands that don't try and stuff their albums full of pop hits but just try to make the best records they can. NLOTH just doesn't fit into your idea of what a good U2 record should be but fits into what U2's idea of what a good record should be.

Why can't U2 do a three hour setlist? The longest show on the 360 tour was 2hrs 37mins. That's a good length. Not everyone can play drums for three hundred hours on tour, or sing for three hours a night. That is damn hard work.

First off, ATYCLB was better than No Line (in my opinion). Second, I don't think anybody on U2 would have much trouble playing three-hour setlists except Bono; in his old(ish) age his voice needs to stay fresh every night. As a drummer, I can honestly say that Larry's playing isn't exactly exhausting.

Springsteen's 10 years older than Bono and he still sounds good....and he plays 3 hour sets. Same thing with McCartney and he's 70. It can be done with the right amount of coaching and care for the voice. Now if Bono had gone crazy with the drugs like many other singers, he might not be able to do it.....but the fact that he still sounds pretty good today (aside from the occasional off note) seems to indicate that they could do 3 hour sets easily. And it honestly surprises me that they don't. They could easily do 30 songs and people would not get bored. It'd allow them to cover stuff from their new CD (even if it's not a smashing success) plus stuff from their other CDs in addition to the greatest hits.

I don't know if Bono takes voice lessons, but if he doesn't, might be something work starting on. Even in the best singers it can make a tremendous difference in terms of control and longevity.

Yeah, but I don't see Springsteen or McCartney doing falsettos and other vocal tricks as often or as well as Bono. If Bono just sang Elevation, Beautiful Day, SBS, and Vertigo for three hours I think he'd be perfectly fine, but if you throw in Bad, The Unforgettable Fire, Miss Sarajevo, and Please in there you might end up with a little bit of a warn-down voice the next night.

Falsetto is actually a lot easier on the male vocal chords than normal singing. You can hear bono singing falsetto deliberately on some of the songs where he just can't reach the notes any more for example Pride or Bad.

As they stand songs like Bad, TUF and Please have no falsetto at all. Bono adds it when he can't reach the notes using his normal singing voice

Springsteen has a very average voice and not much vocal range.  Where as Bono sings the opera.

It's those tight trousers again

I bet you can't take your eyes of 'em, can you Dreamlover?

Who wouldn't be aroused by a short Irish man in tight leather trousers with a sock stuffed down the front

That's not a sock; there's a reason why the B-man is a tenor.

Is it a cucumber?

I'm sorry, Dreamlover, I can't help you.

Then get yourself to muddymatches.co.uk
It's a dating site for farmers

Does the site ask the sheep what they look for in a prospective date?

Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 17, 2012, 05:44:18 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
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
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
They haven't played anything from POP since the Elevation tour because NLOTH was a bad album and they decided to play arenas/stadiums for Vertigo and stadiums only for 360.
Can't believe you can't see this!

 :P

.... because NLOTH is not a bad album. It's the best U2 record since 1997. But then, I like bands that don't try and stuff their albums full of pop hits but just try to make the best records they can. NLOTH just doesn't fit into your idea of what a good U2 record should be but fits into what U2's idea of what a good record should be.

Why can't U2 do a three hour setlist? The longest show on the 360 tour was 2hrs 37mins. That's a good length. Not everyone can play drums for three hundred hours on tour, or sing for three hours a night. That is damn hard work.

First off, ATYCLB was better than No Line (in my opinion). Second, I don't think anybody on U2 would have much trouble playing three-hour setlists except Bono; in his old(ish) age his voice needs to stay fresh every night. As a drummer, I can honestly say that Larry's playing isn't exactly exhausting.

Springsteen's 10 years older than Bono and he still sounds good....and he plays 3 hour sets. Same thing with McCartney and he's 70. It can be done with the right amount of coaching and care for the voice. Now if Bono had gone crazy with the drugs like many other singers, he might not be able to do it.....but the fact that he still sounds pretty good today (aside from the occasional off note) seems to indicate that they could do 3 hour sets easily. And it honestly surprises me that they don't. They could easily do 30 songs and people would not get bored. It'd allow them to cover stuff from their new CD (even if it's not a smashing success) plus stuff from their other CDs in addition to the greatest hits.

I don't know if Bono takes voice lessons, but if he doesn't, might be something work starting on. Even in the best singers it can make a tremendous difference in terms of control and longevity.

Yeah, but I don't see Springsteen or McCartney doing falsettos and other vocal tricks as often or as well as Bono. If Bono just sang Elevation, Beautiful Day, SBS, and Vertigo for three hours I think he'd be perfectly fine, but if you throw in Bad, The Unforgettable Fire, Miss Sarajevo, and Please in there you might end up with a little bit of a warn-down voice the next night.

Falsetto is actually a lot easier on the male vocal chords than normal singing. You can hear bono singing falsetto deliberately on some of the songs where he just can't reach the notes any more for example Pride or Bad.

As they stand songs like Bad, TUF and Please have no falsetto at all. Bono adds it when he can't reach the notes using his normal singing voice

Springsteen has a very average voice and not much vocal range.  Where as Bono sings the opera.

It's those tight trousers again

I bet you can't take your eyes of 'em, can you Dreamlover?

Who wouldn't be aroused by a short Irish man in tight leather trousers with a sock stuffed down the front

That's not a sock; there's a reason why the B-man is a tenor.

Is it a cucumber?

I'm sorry, Dreamlover, I can't help you.

Then get yourself to muddymatches.co.uk
It's a dating site for farmers

Does the site ask the sheep what they look for in a prospective date?

Not sure - more of a horse man myself
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: mattressjedi on April 17, 2012, 05:50:13 PM
 :-\

Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 17, 2012, 05:53:23 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
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
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
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
They haven't played anything from POP since the Elevation tour because NLOTH was a bad album and they decided to play arenas/stadiums for Vertigo and stadiums only for 360.
Can't believe you can't see this!

 :P

.... because NLOTH is not a bad album. It's the best U2 record since 1997. But then, I like bands that don't try and stuff their albums full of pop hits but just try to make the best records they can. NLOTH just doesn't fit into your idea of what a good U2 record should be but fits into what U2's idea of what a good record should be.

Why can't U2 do a three hour setlist? The longest show on the 360 tour was 2hrs 37mins. That's a good length. Not everyone can play drums for three hundred hours on tour, or sing for three hours a night. That is damn hard work.

First off, ATYCLB was better than No Line (in my opinion). Second, I don't think anybody on U2 would have much trouble playing three-hour setlists except Bono; in his old(ish) age his voice needs to stay fresh every night. As a drummer, I can honestly say that Larry's playing isn't exactly exhausting.

Springsteen's 10 years older than Bono and he still sounds good....and he plays 3 hour sets. Same thing with McCartney and he's 70. It can be done with the right amount of coaching and care for the voice. Now if Bono had gone crazy with the drugs like many other singers, he might not be able to do it.....but the fact that he still sounds pretty good today (aside from the occasional off note) seems to indicate that they could do 3 hour sets easily. And it honestly surprises me that they don't. They could easily do 30 songs and people would not get bored. It'd allow them to cover stuff from their new CD (even if it's not a smashing success) plus stuff from their other CDs in addition to the greatest hits.

I don't know if Bono takes voice lessons, but if he doesn't, might be something work starting on. Even in the best singers it can make a tremendous difference in terms of control and longevity.

Yeah, but I don't see Springsteen or McCartney doing falsettos and other vocal tricks as often or as well as Bono. If Bono just sang Elevation, Beautiful Day, SBS, and Vertigo for three hours I think he'd be perfectly fine, but if you throw in Bad, The Unforgettable Fire, Miss Sarajevo, and Please in there you might end up with a little bit of a warn-down voice the next night.

Falsetto is actually a lot easier on the male vocal chords than normal singing. You can hear bono singing falsetto deliberately on some of the songs where he just can't reach the notes any more for example Pride or Bad.

As they stand songs like Bad, TUF and Please have no falsetto at all. Bono adds it when he can't reach the notes using his normal singing voice

Springsteen has a very average voice and not much vocal range.  Where as Bono sings the opera.

It's those tight trousers again

I bet you can't take your eyes of 'em, can you Dreamlover?

Who wouldn't be aroused by a short Irish man in tight leather trousers with a sock stuffed down the front

That's not a sock; there's a reason why the B-man is a tenor.

Is it a cucumber?

I'm sorry, Dreamlover, I can't help you.

Then get yourself to muddymatches.co.uk
It's a dating site for farmers

Does the site ask the sheep what they look for in a prospective date?

Not sure - more of a horse man myself

You gave the impression you're all clued up on the site.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: mattressjedi on April 17, 2012, 06:02:19 PM
There are horses on farms too......... :o
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 18, 2012, 01:39:17 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 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
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
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 anything from POP since the Elevation tour because NLOTH was a bad album and they decided to play arenas/stadiums for Vertigo and stadiums only for 360.
Can't believe you can't see this!

 :P

.... because NLOTH is not a bad album. It's the best U2 record since 1997. But then, I like bands that don't try and stuff their albums full of pop hits but just try to make the best records they can. NLOTH just doesn't fit into your idea of what a good U2 record should be but fits into what U2's idea of what a good record should be.

Why can't U2 do a three hour setlist? The longest show on the 360 tour was 2hrs 37mins. That's a good length. Not everyone can play drums for three hundred hours on tour, or sing for three hours a night. That is damn hard work.

First off, ATYCLB was better than No Line (in my opinion). Second, I don't think anybody on U2 would have much trouble playing three-hour setlists except Bono; in his old(ish) age his voice needs to stay fresh every night. As a drummer, I can honestly say that Larry's playing isn't exactly exhausting.

Springsteen's 10 years older than Bono and he still sounds good....and he plays 3 hour sets. Same thing with McCartney and he's 70. It can be done with the right amount of coaching and care for the voice. Now if Bono had gone crazy with the drugs like many other singers, he might not be able to do it.....but the fact that he still sounds pretty good today (aside from the occasional off note) seems to indicate that they could do 3 hour sets easily. And it honestly surprises me that they don't. They could easily do 30 songs and people would not get bored. It'd allow them to cover stuff from their new CD (even if it's not a smashing success) plus stuff from their other CDs in addition to the greatest hits.

I don't know if Bono takes voice lessons, but if he doesn't, might be something work starting on. Even in the best singers it can make a tremendous difference in terms of control and longevity.

Yeah, but I don't see Springsteen or McCartney doing falsettos and other vocal tricks as often or as well as Bono. If Bono just sang Elevation, Beautiful Day, SBS, and Vertigo for three hours I think he'd be perfectly fine, but if you throw in Bad, The Unforgettable Fire, Miss Sarajevo, and Please in there you might end up with a little bit of a warn-down voice the next night.

Falsetto is actually a lot easier on the male vocal chords than normal singing. You can hear bono singing falsetto deliberately on some of the songs where he just can't reach the notes any more for example Pride or Bad.

As they stand songs like Bad, TUF and Please have no falsetto at all. Bono adds it when he can't reach the notes using his normal singing voice

Springsteen has a very average voice and not much vocal range.  Where as Bono sings the opera.

It's those tight trousers again

I bet you can't take your eyes of 'em, can you Dreamlover?

Who wouldn't be aroused by a short Irish man in tight leather trousers with a sock stuffed down the front

That's not a sock; there's a reason why the B-man is a tenor.

Is it a cucumber?

I'm sorry, Dreamlover, I can't help you.

Then get yourself to muddymatches.co.uk
It's a dating site for farmers

Does the site ask the sheep what they look for in a prospective date?

Not sure - more of a horse man myself

You gave the impression you're all clued up on the site.

I am but draw the line at sheep. I prefer a majestic Stallion
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 18, 2012, 07:24:20 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 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
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
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
They haven't played anything from POP since the Elevation tour because NLOTH was a bad album and they decided to play arenas/stadiums for Vertigo and stadiums only for 360.
Can't believe you can't see this!

 :P

.... because NLOTH is not a bad album. It's the best U2 record since 1997. But then, I like bands that don't try and stuff their albums full of pop hits but just try to make the best records they can. NLOTH just doesn't fit into your idea of what a good U2 record should be but fits into what U2's idea of what a good record should be.

Why can't U2 do a three hour setlist? The longest show on the 360 tour was 2hrs 37mins. That's a good length. Not everyone can play drums for three hundred hours on tour, or sing for three hours a night. That is damn hard work.

First off, ATYCLB was better than No Line (in my opinion). Second, I don't think anybody on U2 would have much trouble playing three-hour setlists except Bono; in his old(ish) age his voice needs to stay fresh every night. As a drummer, I can honestly say that Larry's playing isn't exactly exhausting.

Springsteen's 10 years older than Bono and he still sounds good....and he plays 3 hour sets. Same thing with McCartney and he's 70. It can be done with the right amount of coaching and care for the voice. Now if Bono had gone crazy with the drugs like many other singers, he might not be able to do it.....but the fact that he still sounds pretty good today (aside from the occasional off note) seems to indicate that they could do 3 hour sets easily. And it honestly surprises me that they don't. They could easily do 30 songs and people would not get bored. It'd allow them to cover stuff from their new CD (even if it's not a smashing success) plus stuff from their other CDs in addition to the greatest hits.

I don't know if Bono takes voice lessons, but if he doesn't, might be something work starting on. Even in the best singers it can make a tremendous difference in terms of control and longevity.

Yeah, but I don't see Springsteen or McCartney doing falsettos and other vocal tricks as often or as well as Bono. If Bono just sang Elevation, Beautiful Day, SBS, and Vertigo for three hours I think he'd be perfectly fine, but if you throw in Bad, The Unforgettable Fire, Miss Sarajevo, and Please in there you might end up with a little bit of a warn-down voice the next night.

Falsetto is actually a lot easier on the male vocal chords than normal singing. You can hear bono singing falsetto deliberately on some of the songs where he just can't reach the notes any more for example Pride or Bad.

As they stand songs like Bad, TUF and Please have no falsetto at all. Bono adds it when he can't reach the notes using his normal singing voice

Springsteen has a very average voice and not much vocal range.  Where as Bono sings the opera.

It's those tight trousers again

I bet you can't take your eyes of 'em, can you Dreamlover?

Who wouldn't be aroused by a short Irish man in tight leather trousers with a sock stuffed down the front

That's not a sock; there's a reason why the B-man is a tenor.

Is it a cucumber?

I'm sorry, Dreamlover, I can't help you.

Then get yourself to muddymatches.co.uk
It's a dating site for farmers

Does the site ask the sheep what they look for in a prospective date?

Not sure - more of a horse man myself

You gave the impression you're all clued up on the site.

I am but draw the line at sheep. I prefer a majestic Stallion

I think Chris Martin looks more like a Geography teacher than a majestic Stallion.  But then I don't know what he's like in the bedroom.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 18, 2012, 07:30:08 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 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
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
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
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
They haven't played anything from POP since the Elevation tour because NLOTH was a bad album and they decided to play arenas/stadiums for Vertigo and stadiums only for 360.
Can't believe you can't see this!

 :P

.... because NLOTH is not a bad album. It's the best U2 record since 1997. But then, I like bands that don't try and stuff their albums full of pop hits but just try to make the best records they can. NLOTH just doesn't fit into your idea of what a good U2 record should be but fits into what U2's idea of what a good record should be.

Why can't U2 do a three hour setlist? The longest show on the 360 tour was 2hrs 37mins. That's a good length. Not everyone can play drums for three hundred hours on tour, or sing for three hours a night. That is damn hard work.

First off, ATYCLB was better than No Line (in my opinion). Second, I don't think anybody on U2 would have much trouble playing three-hour setlists except Bono; in his old(ish) age his voice needs to stay fresh every night. As a drummer, I can honestly say that Larry's playing isn't exactly exhausting.

Springsteen's 10 years older than Bono and he still sounds good....and he plays 3 hour sets. Same thing with McCartney and he's 70. It can be done with the right amount of coaching and care for the voice. Now if Bono had gone crazy with the drugs like many other singers, he might not be able to do it.....but the fact that he still sounds pretty good today (aside from the occasional off note) seems to indicate that they could do 3 hour sets easily. And it honestly surprises me that they don't. They could easily do 30 songs and people would not get bored. It'd allow them to cover stuff from their new CD (even if it's not a smashing success) plus stuff from their other CDs in addition to the greatest hits.

I don't know if Bono takes voice lessons, but if he doesn't, might be something work starting on. Even in the best singers it can make a tremendous difference in terms of control and longevity.

Yeah, but I don't see Springsteen or McCartney doing falsettos and other vocal tricks as often or as well as Bono. If Bono just sang Elevation, Beautiful Day, SBS, and Vertigo for three hours I think he'd be perfectly fine, but if you throw in Bad, The Unforgettable Fire, Miss Sarajevo, and Please in there you might end up with a little bit of a warn-down voice the next night.

Falsetto is actually a lot easier on the male vocal chords than normal singing. You can hear bono singing falsetto deliberately on some of the songs where he just can't reach the notes any more for example Pride or Bad.

As they stand songs like Bad, TUF and Please have no falsetto at all. Bono adds it when he can't reach the notes using his normal singing voice

Springsteen has a very average voice and not much vocal range.  Where as Bono sings the opera.

It's those tight trousers again

I bet you can't take your eyes of 'em, can you Dreamlover?

Who wouldn't be aroused by a short Irish man in tight leather trousers with a sock stuffed down the front

That's not a sock; there's a reason why the B-man is a tenor.

Is it a cucumber?

I'm sorry, Dreamlover, I can't help you.

Then get yourself to muddymatches.co.uk
It's a dating site for farmers

Does the site ask the sheep what they look for in a prospective date?

Not sure - more of a horse man myself

You gave the impression you're all clued up on the site.

I am but draw the line at sheep. I prefer a majestic Stallion

I think Chris Martin looks more like a Geography teacher than a majestic Stallion.  But then I don't know what he's like in the bedroom.

Put it this way, he insists on calling me Gwyneth
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 18, 2012, 07:37:02 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 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
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
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
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
They haven't played anything from POP since the Elevation tour because NLOTH was a bad album and they decided to play arenas/stadiums for Vertigo and stadiums only for 360.
Can't believe you can't see this!

 :P

.... because NLOTH is not a bad album. It's the best U2 record since 1997. But then, I like bands that don't try and stuff their albums full of pop hits but just try to make the best records they can. NLOTH just doesn't fit into your idea of what a good U2 record should be but fits into what U2's idea of what a good record should be.

Why can't U2 do a three hour setlist? The longest show on the 360 tour was 2hrs 37mins. That's a good length. Not everyone can play drums for three hundred hours on tour, or sing for three hours a night. That is damn hard work.

First off, ATYCLB was better than No Line (in my opinion). Second, I don't think anybody on U2 would have much trouble playing three-hour setlists except Bono; in his old(ish) age his voice needs to stay fresh every night. As a drummer, I can honestly say that Larry's playing isn't exactly exhausting.

Springsteen's 10 years older than Bono and he still sounds good....and he plays 3 hour sets. Same thing with McCartney and he's 70. It can be done with the right amount of coaching and care for the voice. Now if Bono had gone crazy with the drugs like many other singers, he might not be able to do it.....but the fact that he still sounds pretty good today (aside from the occasional off note) seems to indicate that they could do 3 hour sets easily. And it honestly surprises me that they don't. They could easily do 30 songs and people would not get bored. It'd allow them to cover stuff from their new CD (even if it's not a smashing success) plus stuff from their other CDs in addition to the greatest hits.

I don't know if Bono takes voice lessons, but if he doesn't, might be something work starting on. Even in the best singers it can make a tremendous difference in terms of control and longevity.

Yeah, but I don't see Springsteen or McCartney doing falsettos and other vocal tricks as often or as well as Bono. If Bono just sang Elevation, Beautiful Day, SBS, and Vertigo for three hours I think he'd be perfectly fine, but if you throw in Bad, The Unforgettable Fire, Miss Sarajevo, and Please in there you might end up with a little bit of a warn-down voice the next night.

Falsetto is actually a lot easier on the male vocal chords than normal singing. You can hear bono singing falsetto deliberately on some of the songs where he just can't reach the notes any more for example Pride or Bad.

As they stand songs like Bad, TUF and Please have no falsetto at all. Bono adds it when he can't reach the notes using his normal singing voice

Springsteen has a very average voice and not much vocal range.  Where as Bono sings the opera.

It's those tight trousers again

I bet you can't take your eyes of 'em, can you Dreamlover?

Who wouldn't be aroused by a short Irish man in tight leather trousers with a sock stuffed down the front

That's not a sock; there's a reason why the B-man is a tenor.

Is it a cucumber?

I'm sorry, Dreamlover, I can't help you.

Then get yourself to muddymatches.co.uk
It's a dating site for farmers

Does the site ask the sheep what they look for in a prospective date?

Not sure - more of a horse man myself

You gave the impression you're all clued up on the site.

I am but draw the line at sheep. I prefer a majestic Stallion

I think Chris Martin looks more like a Geography teacher than a majestic Stallion.  But then I don't know what he's like in the bedroom.

Put it this way, he insists on calling me Gwyneth

I bet you just hate that, when he rolls off and calls you by his wife's name.  MEN!  ::)
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 18, 2012, 07:41:50 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 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
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
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
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 anything from POP since the Elevation tour because NLOTH was a bad album and they decided to play arenas/stadiums for Vertigo and stadiums only for 360.
Can't believe you can't see this!

 :P

.... because NLOTH is not a bad album. It's the best U2 record since 1997. But then, I like bands that don't try and stuff their albums full of pop hits but just try to make the best records they can. NLOTH just doesn't fit into your idea of what a good U2 record should be but fits into what U2's idea of what a good record should be.

Why can't U2 do a three hour setlist? The longest show on the 360 tour was 2hrs 37mins. That's a good length. Not everyone can play drums for three hundred hours on tour, or sing for three hours a night. That is damn hard work.

First off, ATYCLB was better than No Line (in my opinion). Second, I don't think anybody on U2 would have much trouble playing three-hour setlists except Bono; in his old(ish) age his voice needs to stay fresh every night. As a drummer, I can honestly say that Larry's playing isn't exactly exhausting.

Springsteen's 10 years older than Bono and he still sounds good....and he plays 3 hour sets. Same thing with McCartney and he's 70. It can be done with the right amount of coaching and care for the voice. Now if Bono had gone crazy with the drugs like many other singers, he might not be able to do it.....but the fact that he still sounds pretty good today (aside from the occasional off note) seems to indicate that they could do 3 hour sets easily. And it honestly surprises me that they don't. They could easily do 30 songs and people would not get bored. It'd allow them to cover stuff from their new CD (even if it's not a smashing success) plus stuff from their other CDs in addition to the greatest hits.

I don't know if Bono takes voice lessons, but if he doesn't, might be something work starting on. Even in the best singers it can make a tremendous difference in terms of control and longevity.

Yeah, but I don't see Springsteen or McCartney doing falsettos and other vocal tricks as often or as well as Bono. If Bono just sang Elevation, Beautiful Day, SBS, and Vertigo for three hours I think he'd be perfectly fine, but if you throw in Bad, The Unforgettable Fire, Miss Sarajevo, and Please in there you might end up with a little bit of a warn-down voice the next night.

Falsetto is actually a lot easier on the male vocal chords than normal singing. You can hear bono singing falsetto deliberately on some of the songs where he just can't reach the notes any more for example Pride or Bad.

As they stand songs like Bad, TUF and Please have no falsetto at all. Bono adds it when he can't reach the notes using his normal singing voice

Springsteen has a very average voice and not much vocal range.  Where as Bono sings the opera.

It's those tight trousers again

I bet you can't take your eyes of 'em, can you Dreamlover?

Who wouldn't be aroused by a short Irish man in tight leather trousers with a sock stuffed down the front

That's not a sock; there's a reason why the B-man is a tenor.

Is it a cucumber?

I'm sorry, Dreamlover, I can't help you.

Then get yourself to muddymatches.co.uk
It's a dating site for farmers

Does the site ask the sheep what they look for in a prospective date?

Not sure - more of a horse man myself

You gave the impression you're all clued up on the site.

I am but draw the line at sheep. I prefer a majestic Stallion

I think Chris Martin looks more like a Geography teacher than a majestic Stallion.  But then I don't know what he's like in the bedroom.

Put it this way, he insists on calling me Gwyneth

I bet you just hate that, when he rolls off and calls you by his wife's name.  MEN!  ::)

He sings Colplay songs to me in the shower - its quite romantic
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 18, 2012, 07:49:30 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 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
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
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
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 anything from POP since the Elevation tour because NLOTH was a bad album and they decided to play arenas/stadiums for Vertigo and stadiums only for 360.
Can't believe you can't see this!

 :P

.... because NLOTH is not a bad album. It's the best U2 record since 1997. But then, I like bands that don't try and stuff their albums full of pop hits but just try to make the best records they can. NLOTH just doesn't fit into your idea of what a good U2 record should be but fits into what U2's idea of what a good record should be.

Why can't U2 do a three hour setlist? The longest show on the 360 tour was 2hrs 37mins. That's a good length. Not everyone can play drums for three hundred hours on tour, or sing for three hours a night. That is damn hard work.

First off, ATYCLB was better than No Line (in my opinion). Second, I don't think anybody on U2 would have much trouble playing three-hour setlists except Bono; in his old(ish) age his voice needs to stay fresh every night. As a drummer, I can honestly say that Larry's playing isn't exactly exhausting.

Springsteen's 10 years older than Bono and he still sounds good....and he plays 3 hour sets. Same thing with McCartney and he's 70. It can be done with the right amount of coaching and care for the voice. Now if Bono had gone crazy with the drugs like many other singers, he might not be able to do it.....but the fact that he still sounds pretty good today (aside from the occasional off note) seems to indicate that they could do 3 hour sets easily. And it honestly surprises me that they don't. They could easily do 30 songs and people would not get bored. It'd allow them to cover stuff from their new CD (even if it's not a smashing success) plus stuff from their other CDs in addition to the greatest hits.

I don't know if Bono takes voice lessons, but if he doesn't, might be something work starting on. Even in the best singers it can make a tremendous difference in terms of control and longevity.

Yeah, but I don't see Springsteen or McCartney doing falsettos and other vocal tricks as often or as well as Bono. If Bono just sang Elevation, Beautiful Day, SBS, and Vertigo for three hours I think he'd be perfectly fine, but if you throw in Bad, The Unforgettable Fire, Miss Sarajevo, and Please in there you might end up with a little bit of a warn-down voice the next night.

Falsetto is actually a lot easier on the male vocal chords than normal singing. You can hear bono singing falsetto deliberately on some of the songs where he just can't reach the notes any more for example Pride or Bad.

As they stand songs like Bad, TUF and Please have no falsetto at all. Bono adds it when he can't reach the notes using his normal singing voice

Springsteen has a very average voice and not much vocal range.  Where as Bono sings the opera.

It's those tight trousers again

I bet you can't take your eyes of 'em, can you Dreamlover?

Who wouldn't be aroused by a short Irish man in tight leather trousers with a sock stuffed down the front

That's not a sock; there's a reason why the B-man is a tenor.

Is it a cucumber?

I'm sorry, Dreamlover, I can't help you.

Then get yourself to muddymatches.co.uk
It's a dating site for farmers

Does the site ask the sheep what they look for in a prospective date?

Not sure - more of a horse man myself

You gave the impression you're all clued up on the site.

I am but draw the line at sheep. I prefer a majestic Stallion

I think Chris Martin looks more like a Geography teacher than a majestic Stallion.  But then I don't know what he's like in the bedroom.

Put it this way, he insists on calling me Gwyneth

I bet you just hate that, when he rolls off and calls you by his wife's name.  MEN!  ::)

He sings Colplay songs to me in the shower - its quite romantic

God Put a Smile upon Your Face ?  He's got such a bighead.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 18, 2012, 07:52:04 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 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
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
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
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
They haven't played anything from POP since the Elevation tour because NLOTH was a bad album and they decided to play arenas/stadiums for Vertigo and stadiums only for 360.
Can't believe you can't see this!

 :P

.... because NLOTH is not a bad album. It's the best U2 record since 1997. But then, I like bands that don't try and stuff their albums full of pop hits but just try to make the best records they can. NLOTH just doesn't fit into your idea of what a good U2 record should be but fits into what U2's idea of what a good record should be.

Why can't U2 do a three hour setlist? The longest show on the 360 tour was 2hrs 37mins. That's a good length. Not everyone can play drums for three hundred hours on tour, or sing for three hours a night. That is damn hard work.

First off, ATYCLB was better than No Line (in my opinion). Second, I don't think anybody on U2 would have much trouble playing three-hour setlists except Bono; in his old(ish) age his voice needs to stay fresh every night. As a drummer, I can honestly say that Larry's playing isn't exactly exhausting.

Springsteen's 10 years older than Bono and he still sounds good....and he plays 3 hour sets. Same thing with McCartney and he's 70. It can be done with the right amount of coaching and care for the voice. Now if Bono had gone crazy with the drugs like many other singers, he might not be able to do it.....but the fact that he still sounds pretty good today (aside from the occasional off note) seems to indicate that they could do 3 hour sets easily. And it honestly surprises me that they don't. They could easily do 30 songs and people would not get bored. It'd allow them to cover stuff from their new CD (even if it's not a smashing success) plus stuff from their other CDs in addition to the greatest hits.

I don't know if Bono takes voice lessons, but if he doesn't, might be something work starting on. Even in the best singers it can make a tremendous difference in terms of control and longevity.

Yeah, but I don't see Springsteen or McCartney doing falsettos and other vocal tricks as often or as well as Bono. If Bono just sang Elevation, Beautiful Day, SBS, and Vertigo for three hours I think he'd be perfectly fine, but if you throw in Bad, The Unforgettable Fire, Miss Sarajevo, and Please in there you might end up with a little bit of a warn-down voice the next night.

Falsetto is actually a lot easier on the male vocal chords than normal singing. You can hear bono singing falsetto deliberately on some of the songs where he just can't reach the notes any more for example Pride or Bad.

As they stand songs like Bad, TUF and Please have no falsetto at all. Bono adds it when he can't reach the notes using his normal singing voice

Springsteen has a very average voice and not much vocal range.  Where as Bono sings the opera.

It's those tight trousers again

I bet you can't take your eyes of 'em, can you Dreamlover?

Who wouldn't be aroused by a short Irish man in tight leather trousers with a sock stuffed down the front

That's not a sock; there's a reason why the B-man is a tenor.

Is it a cucumber?

I'm sorry, Dreamlover, I can't help you.

Then get yourself to muddymatches.co.uk
It's a dating site for farmers

Does the site ask the sheep what they look for in a prospective date?

Not sure - more of a horse man myself

You gave the impression you're all clued up on the site.

I am but draw the line at sheep. I prefer a majestic Stallion

I think Chris Martin looks more like a Geography teacher than a majestic Stallion.  But then I don't know what he's like in the bedroom.

Put it this way, he insists on calling me Gwyneth

I bet you just hate that, when he rolls off and calls you by his wife's name.  MEN!  ::)

He sings Colplay songs to me in the shower - its quite romantic

God Put a Smile upon Your Face ?  He's got such a bighead.

Amen to that
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 18, 2012, 07:54:00 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 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
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
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
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
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
They haven't played anything from POP since the Elevation tour because NLOTH was a bad album and they decided to play arenas/stadiums for Vertigo and stadiums only for 360.
Can't believe you can't see this!

 :P

.... because NLOTH is not a bad album. It's the best U2 record since 1997. But then, I like bands that don't try and stuff their albums full of pop hits but just try to make the best records they can. NLOTH just doesn't fit into your idea of what a good U2 record should be but fits into what U2's idea of what a good record should be.

Why can't U2 do a three hour setlist? The longest show on the 360 tour was 2hrs 37mins. That's a good length. Not everyone can play drums for three hundred hours on tour, or sing for three hours a night. That is damn hard work.

First off, ATYCLB was better than No Line (in my opinion). Second, I don't think anybody on U2 would have much trouble playing three-hour setlists except Bono; in his old(ish) age his voice needs to stay fresh every night. As a drummer, I can honestly say that Larry's playing isn't exactly exhausting.

Springsteen's 10 years older than Bono and he still sounds good....and he plays 3 hour sets. Same thing with McCartney and he's 70. It can be done with the right amount of coaching and care for the voice. Now if Bono had gone crazy with the drugs like many other singers, he might not be able to do it.....but the fact that he still sounds pretty good today (aside from the occasional off note) seems to indicate that they could do 3 hour sets easily. And it honestly surprises me that they don't. They could easily do 30 songs and people would not get bored. It'd allow them to cover stuff from their new CD (even if it's not a smashing success) plus stuff from their other CDs in addition to the greatest hits.

I don't know if Bono takes voice lessons, but if he doesn't, might be something work starting on. Even in the best singers it can make a tremendous difference in terms of control and longevity.

Yeah, but I don't see Springsteen or McCartney doing falsettos and other vocal tricks as often or as well as Bono. If Bono just sang Elevation, Beautiful Day, SBS, and Vertigo for three hours I think he'd be perfectly fine, but if you throw in Bad, The Unforgettable Fire, Miss Sarajevo, and Please in there you might end up with a little bit of a warn-down voice the next night.

Falsetto is actually a lot easier on the male vocal chords than normal singing. You can hear bono singing falsetto deliberately on some of the songs where he just can't reach the notes any more for example Pride or Bad.

As they stand songs like Bad, TUF and Please have no falsetto at all. Bono adds it when he can't reach the notes using his normal singing voice

Springsteen has a very average voice and not much vocal range.  Where as Bono sings the opera.

It's those tight trousers again

I bet you can't take your eyes of 'em, can you Dreamlover?

Who wouldn't be aroused by a short Irish man in tight leather trousers with a sock stuffed down the front

That's not a sock; there's a reason why the B-man is a tenor.

Is it a cucumber?

I'm sorry, Dreamlover, I can't help you.

Then get yourself to muddymatches.co.uk
It's a dating site for farmers

Does the site ask the sheep what they look for in a prospective date?

Not sure - more of a horse man myself

You gave the impression you're all clued up on the site.

I am but draw the line at sheep. I prefer a majestic Stallion

I think Chris Martin looks more like a Geography teacher than a majestic Stallion.  But then I don't know what he's like in the bedroom.

Put it this way, he insists on calling me Gwyneth

I bet you just hate that, when he rolls off and calls you by his wife's name.  MEN!  ::)

He sings Colplay songs to me in the shower - its quite romantic

God Put a Smile upon Your Face ?  He's got such a bighead.

Amen to that

Cheesy too?

Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 18, 2012, 08:05:09 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 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
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
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
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
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
They haven't played anything from POP since the Elevation tour because NLOTH was a bad album and they decided to play arenas/stadiums for Vertigo and stadiums only for 360.
Can't believe you can't see this!

 :P

.... because NLOTH is not a bad album. It's the best U2 record since 1997. But then, I like bands that don't try and stuff their albums full of pop hits but just try to make the best records they can. NLOTH just doesn't fit into your idea of what a good U2 record should be but fits into what U2's idea of what a good record should be.

Why can't U2 do a three hour setlist? The longest show on the 360 tour was 2hrs 37mins. That's a good length. Not everyone can play drums for three hundred hours on tour, or sing for three hours a night. That is damn hard work.

First off, ATYCLB was better than No Line (in my opinion). Second, I don't think anybody on U2 would have much trouble playing three-hour setlists except Bono; in his old(ish) age his voice needs to stay fresh every night. As a drummer, I can honestly say that Larry's playing isn't exactly exhausting.

Springsteen's 10 years older than Bono and he still sounds good....and he plays 3 hour sets. Same thing with McCartney and he's 70. It can be done with the right amount of coaching and care for the voice. Now if Bono had gone crazy with the drugs like many other singers, he might not be able to do it.....but the fact that he still sounds pretty good today (aside from the occasional off note) seems to indicate that they could do 3 hour sets easily. And it honestly surprises me that they don't. They could easily do 30 songs and people would not get bored. It'd allow them to cover stuff from their new CD (even if it's not a smashing success) plus stuff from their other CDs in addition to the greatest hits.

I don't know if Bono takes voice lessons, but if he doesn't, might be something work starting on. Even in the best singers it can make a tremendous difference in terms of control and longevity.

Yeah, but I don't see Springsteen or McCartney doing falsettos and other vocal tricks as often or as well as Bono. If Bono just sang Elevation, Beautiful Day, SBS, and Vertigo for three hours I think he'd be perfectly fine, but if you throw in Bad, The Unforgettable Fire, Miss Sarajevo, and Please in there you might end up with a little bit of a warn-down voice the next night.

Falsetto is actually a lot easier on the male vocal chords than normal singing. You can hear bono singing falsetto deliberately on some of the songs where he just can't reach the notes any more for example Pride or Bad.

As they stand songs like Bad, TUF and Please have no falsetto at all. Bono adds it when he can't reach the notes using his normal singing voice

Springsteen has a very average voice and not much vocal range.  Where as Bono sings the opera.

It's those tight trousers again

I bet you can't take your eyes of 'em, can you Dreamlover?

Who wouldn't be aroused by a short Irish man in tight leather trousers with a sock stuffed down the front

That's not a sock; there's a reason why the B-man is a tenor.

Is it a cucumber?

I'm sorry, Dreamlover, I can't help you.

Then get yourself to muddymatches.co.uk
It's a dating site for farmers

Does the site ask the sheep what they look for in a prospective date?

Not sure - more of a horse man myself

You gave the impression you're all clued up on the site.

I am but draw the line at sheep. I prefer a majestic Stallion

I think Chris Martin looks more like a Geography teacher than a majestic Stallion.  But then I don't know what he's like in the bedroom.

Put it this way, he insists on calling me Gwyneth

I bet you just hate that, when he rolls off and calls you by his wife's name.  MEN!  ::)

He sings Colplay songs to me in the shower - its quite romantic

God Put a Smile upon Your Face ?  He's got such a bighead.

Amen to that

Cheesy too?

No, Gwyneth is very particular
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: The Unknown Caller on April 18, 2012, 02:51:18 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I'm not sure why they don't just extend the setlist to 3 hours and include some of the songs people have been asking for. I'd love to hear a couple songs from Pop at least....and at least a few from NLOTH. If Springsteen, McCartney and even the Foo Fighters can do the 3 hour setlist, why can't U2?

Willie Williams talked about this once in his diaries in the context of cutting out a song to make way for another one; basically said that they all thought that any longer than about 2 hours 20 minutes and the show started to drag for the audience.

Yeah, I think it's total crap as an explanation too. :P
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: mattressjedi on April 18, 2012, 03:55:53 PM
Yeah I never bought the "it drags for the audience" explanation. They also used the "they had to obey curfews" in a few towns as another excuse.

I really think it comes from McGuiness. I think he has this whole "leave em wanting more" attitude.

That's also why they've seriously underplayed some areas of the world over the years too I'm convinced.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Midnight is Where the Day Begins on April 18, 2012, 04:01:57 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I'm not sure why they don't just extend the setlist to 3 hours and include some of the songs people have been asking for. I'd love to hear a couple songs from Pop at least....and at least a few from NLOTH. If Springsteen, McCartney and even the Foo Fighters can do the 3 hour setlist, why can't U2?

Willie Williams talked about this once in his diaries in the context of cutting out a song to make way for another one; basically said that they all thought that any longer than about 2 hours 20 minutes and the show started to drag for the audience.

Yeah, I think it's total crap as an explanation too. :P

They've watched performances by Pearl Jam or Springsteen no?  :D

Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 18, 2012, 04:53:53 PM
I think 2 hours is about right for a rock concert.  Remember, quality matters more than stamina.  Or so my gf assures me.

U2 played almost as many songs per show on 360 as Springsteen plays on his current tour.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: The Unknown Caller on April 18, 2012, 05:24:32 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
U2 played almost as many songs per show on 360 as Springsteen plays on his current tour.

Springsteen's probably playing about 3-4 songs more per night (From memory, U2 played 23 most nights with one as the very-very-short MLK/Scarlet) and it's lasting a good 30-45 mins longer.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: mattressjedi on April 18, 2012, 06:09:41 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
U2 played almost as many songs per show on 360 as Springsteen plays on his current tour.

Springsteen's probably playing about 3-4 songs more per night (From memory, U2 played 23 most nights with one as the very-very-short MLK/Scarlet) and it's lasting a good 30-45 mins longer.

Springsteen's shows though have always had a improvisational element to parts of the setlist that U2 has never brought live.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Midnight is Where the Day Begins on April 18, 2012, 07:53:31 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
U2 played almost as many songs per show on 360 as Springsteen plays on his current tour.

Springsteen's probably playing about 3-4 songs more per night (From memory, U2 played 23 most nights with one as the very-very-short MLK/Scarlet) and it's lasting a good 30-45 mins longer.

Springsteen's shows though have always had a improvisational element to parts of the setlist that U2 has never brought live.

I think its much easier for Springsteen and the E Streeters to randomly play a song out of their catalog than it is for U2.

Bruce pulled out My Love Will Not Let You Down at my Working on a Dream concert, and it sounded like they've been playing it all tour.

U2 played an improvisational Love Rescue Me after All I Want is You, and it sounded like they could barely keep afloat.

I blame U2's lack of improvisational skills on Edge actually. Since the band has so many different guitar sounds, its impossible for him to randomly float to different songs here and there because of equipment they might need for said song. That and Bono is terrible at remembering lyrics.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: tigerfan41 on April 18, 2012, 09:17:06 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I'm not sure why they don't just extend the setlist to 3 hours and include some of the songs people have been asking for. I'd love to hear a couple songs from Pop at least....and at least a few from NLOTH. If Springsteen, McCartney and even the Foo Fighters can do the 3 hour setlist, why can't U2?

Willie Williams talked about this once in his diaries in the context of cutting out a song to make way for another one; basically said that they all thought that any longer than about 2 hours 20 minutes and the show started to drag for the audience.

Yeah, I think it's total crap as an explanation too. :P

:P That's the biggest load of crap. Maybe for a band with a relatively small catalog of songs it would drag, but when you've had as many hit singles as U2 have and a slew of great songs that weren't singles (but that fans love), a 3 hour set would go over well with the crowd. They could easily play 28 or 29 songs per night and most of the audience (if not all) would love it.

If U2 wanted to, they could do it. Regarding the improv: that's something they could work on and perfect like Springsteen has. It just seems like they don't even want to. And if remembering lyrics is a problem, just give Bono an iPad with all the U2 lyrics loaded onto it to carry around stage.  :D
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 19, 2012, 12:56:23 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I think 2 hours is about right for a rock concert.  Remember, quality matters more than stamina.  Or so my gf assures me.

U2 played almost as many songs per show on 360 as Springsteen plays on his current tour.

You have a GIRLFRIEND?
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 19, 2012, 01:05:56 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
U2 played almost as many songs per show on 360 as Springsteen plays on his current tour.

Springsteen's probably playing about 3-4 songs more per night (From memory, U2 played 23 most nights with one as the very-very-short MLK/Scarlet) and it's lasting a good 30-45 mins longer.

Springsteen's shows though have always had a improvisational element to parts of the setlist that U2 has never brought live.

Improvising is harder for U2 has they often use visuals - their shows are highly choreographed. Plus the E Street band are a much tighter outfit than U2. Bruce is constantly touring. U2 leave years between tours.

As for lyrics, bono has an autocue
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: satellitedog01 on April 19, 2012, 01:27:06 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I blame U2's lack of improvisational skills on Edge actually. Since the band has so many different guitar sounds, its impossible for him to randomly float to different songs here and there because of equipment they might need for said song. That and Bono is terrible at remembering lyrics.
For the world's biggest band this is about the lamest excuse one could come up with.
1.) The Edge's guitar sounds are handled by his techs and himself, and it would be totally feasible to program and save all his sounds ever with the technology at hand.
2.)Bono has been working with a teleprompter since at least ZooTV, so his lyrics are available at all times. I don't think many people would find it degrading even if bono held the lyric sheet in his hand while singing either.
3.) When they bring out unexpected, unrehearsed songs, it's Edge and Bono most of the time, so it raises the suspicion it's actually Adam who doesn't know the songs by heart, since Larry could be excused for needing the break from the demanding job he's doing all night. Or maybe he doesn't deserve the excuse. Of course there's also the fact they are working with backing tracks, and that is a delicate and less flexible construction, than playing straightforward rock music. Besides it could be they've been working too long and almost exclusively with a click-driven set of backing tracks that is prohibitive towards improvisation, and might have made them afraid to work without it.

The major thing is unfortunately they aren't musicians, they can play what they practice long enough, and they've never practiced enough to know their entire catalogue, or even to be confident playing under-rehearsed material, so they just don't.
Let's not excuse this with perfectionism, please. It's another trait we are looking for. :-)

I
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: satellitedog01 on April 19, 2012, 01:33:56 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Improvising is harder for U2 has they often use visuals - their shows are highly choreographed.

Almost as choreographed as Madonna's Superbowl Half Time show, or Spiderman Turn off the Dark, aren't they?! :-)))))
They just don't put in the hours of work it would take to be able to pull off extra material. Most bands rehearse many more tunes than U2 before they go on tour...
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 19, 2012, 01:38:57 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Improvising is harder for U2 has they often use visuals - their shows are highly choreographed.

Almost as choreographed as Madonna's Superbowl Half Time show, or Spiderman Turn off the Dark, aren't they?! :-)))))
They just don't put in the hours of work it would take to be able to pull off extra material. Most bands rehearse many more tunes than U2 before they go on tour...

Agreed - Sprinsgteen can pull any song out of the hat because he's always playing, always touring.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: The Unknown Caller on April 19, 2012, 05:39:48 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
Improvising is harder for U2 has they often use visuals - their shows are highly choreographed.

Almost as choreographed as Madonna's Superbowl Half Time show, or Spiderman Turn off the Dark, aren't they?! :-)))))
They just don't put in the hours of work it would take to be able to pull off extra material. Most bands rehearse many more tunes than U2 before they go on tour...

Agreed - Sprinsgteen can pull any song out of the hat because he's always playing, always touring.

To be honest though, while I do share these criticisms of U2, the Springsteen fandom made me feel better because they are all still constantly complaining that he plays too many of the same songs every night, not enough different songs, and neglects certain albums. Which consoled me in the knowledge that EVERY fandom does it. :D
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 19, 2012, 05:41:59 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 are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Improvising is harder for U2 has they often use visuals - their shows are highly choreographed.

Almost as choreographed as Madonna's Superbowl Half Time show, or Spiderman Turn off the Dark, aren't they?! :-)))))
They just don't put in the hours of work it would take to be able to pull off extra material. Most bands rehearse many more tunes than U2 before they go on tour...

Agreed - Sprinsgteen can pull any song out of the hat because he's always playing, always touring.

To be honest though, while I do share these criticisms of U2, the Springsteen fandom made me feel better because they are all still constantly complaining that he plays too many of the same songs every night, not enough different songs, and neglects certain albums. Which consoled me in the knowledge that EVERY fandom does it. :D

Well, facts are facts - I've seen the Boss play the most obscure songs chosen by fans on the night. They're a really tight band and never stop performing which is why he can do that.

U2 are average live musicians - and very lazy these days
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 19, 2012, 11:41:10 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
Improvising is harder for U2 has they often use visuals - their shows are highly choreographed.

Almost as choreographed as Madonna's Superbowl Half Time show, or Spiderman Turn off the Dark, aren't they?! :-)))))
They just don't put in the hours of work it would take to be able to pull off extra material. Most bands rehearse many more tunes than U2 before they go on tour...

Agreed - Sprinsgteen can pull any song out of the hat because he's always playing, always touring.

This is the way an artist should be - always rehearsing, always playing and always touring.  Then they know their music inside out and can start to experiment in an improvisational way.  Plus, I think it helps in the creative process of making new music and recording new albums.  The Rolling Stones, as part-timers, play Stones CD's and listen to their old songs when they rehearse before the start of every tour, literally learning how to play them live all over again.  I suspect this is the approach U2 take. 
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 19, 2012, 11:48:26 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 are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Improvising is harder for U2 has they often use visuals - their shows are highly choreographed.

Almost as choreographed as Madonna's Superbowl Half Time show, or Spiderman Turn off the Dark, aren't they?! :-)))))
They just don't put in the hours of work it would take to be able to pull off extra material. Most bands rehearse many more tunes than U2 before they go on tour...

Agreed - Sprinsgteen can pull any song out of the hat because he's always playing, always touring.

To be honest though, while I do share these criticisms of U2, the Springsteen fandom made me feel better because they are all still constantly complaining that he plays too many of the same songs every night, not enough different songs, and neglects certain albums. Which consoled me in the knowledge that EVERY fandom does it. :D

Well, facts are facts - I've seen the Boss play the most obscure songs chosen by fans on the night. They're a really tight band and never stop performing which is why he can do that.

But still, those 'obscure' songs will have been rehearsed.

Quote
U2 are average live musicians - and very lazy these days

U2 are only average musicians, but they have rehearsed and played a more extensive repertoire on recent tours than they did in the past.  Where they are, perhaps, lazier, is that most songs on the last three tours sound very similar.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 19, 2012, 01:42:56 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
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Improvising is harder for U2 has they often use visuals - their shows are highly choreographed.

Almost as choreographed as Madonna's Superbowl Half Time show, or Spiderman Turn off the Dark, aren't they?! :-)))))
They just don't put in the hours of work it would take to be able to pull off extra material. Most bands rehearse many more tunes than U2 before they go on tour...

Agreed - Sprinsgteen can pull any song out of the hat because he's always playing, always touring.

To be honest though, while I do share these criticisms of U2, the Springsteen fandom made me feel better because they are all still constantly complaining that he plays too many of the same songs every night, not enough different songs, and neglects certain albums. Which consoled me in the knowledge that EVERY fandom does it. :D

Well, facts are facts - I've seen the Boss play the most obscure songs chosen by fans on the night. They're a really tight band and never stop performing which is why he can do that.

But still, those 'obscure' songs will have been rehearsed.

Quote
U2 are average live musicians - and very lazy these days

U2 are only average musicians, but they have rehearsed and played a more extensive repertoire on recent tours than they did in the past.  Where they are, perhaps, lazier, is that most songs on the last three tours sound very similar.

True - however the Boss lives rock n roll whereas U2 are pretenders in the field. This means he rehearses on the job
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: mattressjedi on April 19, 2012, 02:09:01 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I blame U2's lack of improvisational skills on Edge actually. Since the band has so many different guitar sounds, its impossible for him to randomly float to different songs here and there because of equipment they might need for said song. That and Bono is terrible at remembering lyrics.
For the world's biggest band this is about the lamest excuse one could come up with.
1.) The Edge's guitar sounds are handled by his techs and himself, and it would be totally feasible to program and save all his sounds ever with the technology at hand.
2.)Bono has been working with a teleprompter since at least ZooTV, so his lyrics are available at all times. I don't think many people would find it degrading even if bono held the lyric sheet in his hand while singing either.
3.) When they bring out unexpected, unrehearsed songs, it's Edge and Bono most of the time, so it raises the suspicion it's actually Adam who doesn't know the songs by heart, since Larry could be excused for needing the break from the demanding job he's doing all night. Or maybe he doesn't deserve the excuse. Of course there's also the fact they are working with backing tracks, and that is a delicate and less flexible construction, than playing straightforward rock music. Besides it could be they've been working too long and almost exclusively with a click-driven set of backing tracks that is prohibitive towards improvisation, and might have made them afraid to work without it.

The major thing is unfortunately they aren't musicians, they can play what they practice long enough, and they've never practiced enough to know their entire catalogue, or even to be confident playing under-rehearsed material, so they just don't.
Let's not excuse this with perfectionism, please. It's another trait we are looking for. :-)

I

It's not only feasible for The edge to do, but that's actually what he does now with his rig where he goes from one song to another for different sounds with his foot pedals.
The real reason they don't do varied and longer sets is because they can't. As you stated, they aren't musicians. Not in the truest sense like Daniel Lanois or some other people they've played with.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 19, 2012, 02:12:55 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
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Improvising is harder for U2 has they often use visuals - their shows are highly choreographed.

Almost as choreographed as Madonna's Superbowl Half Time show, or Spiderman Turn off the Dark, aren't they?! :-)))))
They just don't put in the hours of work it would take to be able to pull off extra material. Most bands rehearse many more tunes than U2 before they go on tour...

Agreed - Sprinsgteen can pull any song out of the hat because he's always playing, always touring.

To be honest though, while I do share these criticisms of U2, the Springsteen fandom made me feel better because they are all still constantly complaining that he plays too many of the same songs every night, not enough different songs, and neglects certain albums. Which consoled me in the knowledge that EVERY fandom does it. :D

Well, facts are facts - I've seen the Boss play the most obscure songs chosen by fans on the night. They're a really tight band and never stop performing which is why he can do that.

But still, those 'obscure' songs will have been rehearsed.

Quote
U2 are average live musicians - and very lazy these days

U2 are only average musicians, but they have rehearsed and played a more extensive repertoire on recent tours than they did in the past.  Where they are, perhaps, lazier, is that most songs on the last three tours sound very similar.

True - however the Boss lives rock n roll whereas U2 are pretenders in the field. This means he rehearses on the job

I agree, some artists, such as Prince, live and breathe music and don't see any separation between work and leisure.  Many others, however, see rock and roll as a job, and often enough, a part time one at that.

Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: singnomore on April 19, 2012, 02:15:34 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
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
Improvising is harder for U2 has they often use visuals - their shows are highly choreographed.

Almost as choreographed as Madonna's Superbowl Half Time show, or Spiderman Turn off the Dark, aren't they?! :-)))))
They just don't put in the hours of work it would take to be able to pull off extra material. Most bands rehearse many more tunes than U2 before they go on tour...

Agreed - Sprinsgteen can pull any song out of the hat because he's always playing, always touring.

To be honest though, while I do share these criticisms of U2, the Springsteen fandom made me feel better because they are all still constantly complaining that he plays too many of the same songs every night, not enough different songs, and neglects certain albums. Which consoled me in the knowledge that EVERY fandom does it. :D

Well, facts are facts - I've seen the Boss play the most obscure songs chosen by fans on the night. They're a really tight band and never stop performing which is why he can do that.

But still, those 'obscure' songs will have been rehearsed.

Quote
U2 are average live musicians - and very lazy these days

U2 are only average musicians, but they have rehearsed and played a more extensive repertoire on recent tours than they did in the past.  Where they are, perhaps, lazier, is that most songs on the last three tours sound very similar.

True - however the Boss lives rock n roll whereas U2 are pretenders in the field. This means he rehearses on the job

I agree, some artists, such as Prince, live and breathe music and don't see any separation between work and leisure.  Many others, however, see rock and roll as a job, and often enough, a part time one at that.



Anyone that earns the money they do for an extended time period in this industry views it as a job...no matter who they are
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 19, 2012, 02:18:34 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
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
Improvising is harder for U2 has they often use visuals - their shows are highly choreographed.

Almost as choreographed as Madonna's Superbowl Half Time show, or Spiderman Turn off the Dark, aren't they?! :-)))))
They just don't put in the hours of work it would take to be able to pull off extra material. Most bands rehearse many more tunes than U2 before they go on tour...

Agreed - Sprinsgteen can pull any song out of the hat because he's always playing, always touring.

To be honest though, while I do share these criticisms of U2, the Springsteen fandom made me feel better because they are all still constantly complaining that he plays too many of the same songs every night, not enough different songs, and neglects certain albums. Which consoled me in the knowledge that EVERY fandom does it. :D

Well, facts are facts - I've seen the Boss play the most obscure songs chosen by fans on the night. They're a really tight band and never stop performing which is why he can do that.

But still, those 'obscure' songs will have been rehearsed.

Quote
U2 are average live musicians - and very lazy these days

U2 are only average musicians, but they have rehearsed and played a more extensive repertoire on recent tours than they did in the past.  Where they are, perhaps, lazier, is that most songs on the last three tours sound very similar.

True - however the Boss lives rock n roll whereas U2 are pretenders in the field. This means he rehearses on the job

I agree, some artists, such as Prince, live and breathe music and don't see any separation between work and leisure.  Many others, however, see rock and roll as a job, and often enough, a part time one at that.



Anyone that earns the money they do for an extended time period in this industry views it as a job...no matter who they are

Most do, but Prince doesn't.

Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: mattressjedi on April 19, 2012, 02:21:09 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
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
Improvising is harder for U2 has they often use visuals - their shows are highly choreographed.

Almost as choreographed as Madonna's Superbowl Half Time show, or Spiderman Turn off the Dark, aren't they?! :-)))))
They just don't put in the hours of work it would take to be able to pull off extra material. Most bands rehearse many more tunes than U2 before they go on tour...

Agreed - Sprinsgteen can pull any song out of the hat because he's always playing, always touring.

To be honest though, while I do share these criticisms of U2, the Springsteen fandom made me feel better because they are all still constantly complaining that he plays too many of the same songs every night, not enough different songs, and neglects certain albums. Which consoled me in the knowledge that EVERY fandom does it. :D

Well, facts are facts - I've seen the Boss play the most obscure songs chosen by fans on the night. They're a really tight band and never stop performing which is why he can do that.

But still, those 'obscure' songs will have been rehearsed.

Quote
U2 are average live musicians - and very lazy these days

U2 are only average musicians, but they have rehearsed and played a more extensive repertoire on recent tours than they did in the past.  Where they are, perhaps, lazier, is that most songs on the last three tours sound very similar.

True - however the Boss lives rock n roll whereas U2 are pretenders in the field. This means he rehearses on the job

I agree, some artists, such as Prince, live and breathe music and don't see any separation between work and leisure.  Many others, however, see rock and roll as a job, and often enough, a part time one at that.



Anyone that earns the money they do for an extended time period in this industry views it as a job...no matter who they are

Yeah but some people live their job. U2 do not.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 19, 2012, 02:22:14 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
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
Improvising is harder for U2 has they often use visuals - their shows are highly choreographed.

Almost as choreographed as Madonna's Superbowl Half Time show, or Spiderman Turn off the Dark, aren't they?! :-)))))
They just don't put in the hours of work it would take to be able to pull off extra material. Most bands rehearse many more tunes than U2 before they go on tour...

Agreed - Sprinsgteen can pull any song out of the hat because he's always playing, always touring.

To be honest though, while I do share these criticisms of U2, the Springsteen fandom made me feel better because they are all still constantly complaining that he plays too many of the same songs every night, not enough different songs, and neglects certain albums. Which consoled me in the knowledge that EVERY fandom does it. :D

Well, facts are facts - I've seen the Boss play the most obscure songs chosen by fans on the night. They're a really tight band and never stop performing which is why he can do that.

But still, those 'obscure' songs will have been rehearsed.

Quote
U2 are average live musicians - and very lazy these days

U2 are only average musicians, but they have rehearsed and played a more extensive repertoire on recent tours than they did in the past.  Where they are, perhaps, lazier, is that most songs on the last three tours sound very similar.

True - however the Boss lives rock n roll whereas U2 are pretenders in the field. This means he rehearses on the job

I agree, some artists, such as Prince, live and breathe music and don't see any separation between work and leisure.  Many others, however, see rock and roll as a job, and often enough, a part time one at that.

I sense our Irish chums lived rock n roll in their glory days.

However since shorty decided he was more interested in cod politics rather than being in a band the music has clearly suffered.

Prince is a good Bruce style example
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: singnomore on April 19, 2012, 02:23:26 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
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
Improvising is harder for U2 has they often use visuals - their shows are highly choreographed.

Almost as choreographed as Madonna's Superbowl Half Time show, or Spiderman Turn off the Dark, aren't they?! :-)))))
They just don't put in the hours of work it would take to be able to pull off extra material. Most bands rehearse many more tunes than U2 before they go on tour...

Agreed - Sprinsgteen can pull any song out of the hat because he's always playing, always touring.

To be honest though, while I do share these criticisms of U2, the Springsteen fandom made me feel better because they are all still constantly complaining that he plays too many of the same songs every night, not enough different songs, and neglects certain albums. Which consoled me in the knowledge that EVERY fandom does it. :D

Well, facts are facts - I've seen the Boss play the most obscure songs chosen by fans on the night. They're a really tight band and never stop performing which is why he can do that.

But still, those 'obscure' songs will have been rehearsed.

Quote
U2 are average live musicians - and very lazy these days

U2 are only average musicians, but they have rehearsed and played a more extensive repertoire on recent tours than they did in the past.  Where they are, perhaps, lazier, is that most songs on the last three tours sound very similar.

True - however the Boss lives rock n roll whereas U2 are pretenders in the field. This means he rehearses on the job

I agree, some artists, such as Prince, live and breathe music and don't see any separation between work and leisure.  Many others, however, see rock and roll as a job, and often enough, a part time one at that.



Anyone that earns the money they do for an extended time period in this industry views it as a job...no matter who they are

Yeah but some people live their job. U2 do not.

And the evidence for living and U2 not is based on?
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: mattressjedi on April 19, 2012, 02:23:48 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
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
Improvising is harder for U2 has they often use visuals - their shows are highly choreographed.

Almost as choreographed as Madonna's Superbowl Half Time show, or Spiderman Turn off the Dark, aren't they?! :-)))))
They just don't put in the hours of work it would take to be able to pull off extra material. Most bands rehearse many more tunes than U2 before they go on tour...

Agreed - Sprinsgteen can pull any song out of the hat because he's always playing, always touring.

To be honest though, while I do share these criticisms of U2, the Springsteen fandom made me feel better because they are all still constantly complaining that he plays too many of the same songs every night, not enough different songs, and neglects certain albums. Which consoled me in the knowledge that EVERY fandom does it. :D

Well, facts are facts - I've seen the Boss play the most obscure songs chosen by fans on the night. They're a really tight band and never stop performing which is why he can do that.

But still, those 'obscure' songs will have been rehearsed.

Quote
U2 are average live musicians - and very lazy these days

U2 are only average musicians, but they have rehearsed and played a more extensive repertoire on recent tours than they did in the past.  Where they are, perhaps, lazier, is that most songs on the last three tours sound very similar.

True - however the Boss lives rock n roll whereas U2 are pretenders in the field. This means he rehearses on the job

I agree, some artists, such as Prince, live and breathe music and don't see any separation between work and leisure.  Many others, however, see rock and roll as a job, and often enough, a part time one at that.

I sense our Irish chums lived rock n roll in their glory days.

However since shorty decided he was more interested in cod politics rather than being in a band the music has clearly suffered.

Prince is a good Bruce style example
Yeah, but Prince is even deep into it I think.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: mattressjedi on April 19, 2012, 02:26:05 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 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
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
Improvising is harder for U2 has they often use visuals - their shows are highly choreographed.

Almost as choreographed as Madonna's Superbowl Half Time show, or Spiderman Turn off the Dark, aren't they?! :-)))))
They just don't put in the hours of work it would take to be able to pull off extra material. Most bands rehearse many more tunes than U2 before they go on tour...

Agreed - Sprinsgteen can pull any song out of the hat because he's always playing, always touring.

To be honest though, while I do share these criticisms of U2, the Springsteen fandom made me feel better because they are all still constantly complaining that he plays too many of the same songs every night, not enough different songs, and neglects certain albums. Which consoled me in the knowledge that EVERY fandom does it. :D

Well, facts are facts - I've seen the Boss play the most obscure songs chosen by fans on the night. They're a really tight band and never stop performing which is why he can do that.

But still, those 'obscure' songs will have been rehearsed.

Quote
U2 are average live musicians - and very lazy these days

U2 are only average musicians, but they have rehearsed and played a more extensive repertoire on recent tours than they did in the past.  Where they are, perhaps, lazier, is that most songs on the last three tours sound very similar.

True - however the Boss lives rock n roll whereas U2 are pretenders in the field. This means he rehearses on the job

I agree, some artists, such as Prince, live and breathe music and don't see any separation between work and leisure.  Many others, however, see rock and roll as a job, and often enough, a part time one at that.



Anyone that earns the money they do for an extended time period in this industry views it as a job...no matter who they are

Yeah but some people live their job. U2 do not.

And the evidence for living and U2 not is based on?

The fact that as many as half of the members of U2 can take a break from the band and not touch their instruments for 6 months.

Not gonna happen with Bruce. Not gonna happen with Danny Lanois. Certainly not happening with Prince.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: singnomore on April 19, 2012, 02:26:54 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
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
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Improvising is harder for U2 has they often use visuals - their shows are highly choreographed.

Almost as choreographed as Madonna's Superbowl Half Time show, or Spiderman Turn off the Dark, aren't they?! :-)))))
They just don't put in the hours of work it would take to be able to pull off extra material. Most bands rehearse many more tunes than U2 before they go on tour...

Agreed - Sprinsgteen can pull any song out of the hat because he's always playing, always touring.

To be honest though, while I do share these criticisms of U2, the Springsteen fandom made me feel better because they are all still constantly complaining that he plays too many of the same songs every night, not enough different songs, and neglects certain albums. Which consoled me in the knowledge that EVERY fandom does it. :D

Well, facts are facts - I've seen the Boss play the most obscure songs chosen by fans on the night. They're a really tight band and never stop performing which is why he can do that.

But still, those 'obscure' songs will have been rehearsed.

Quote
U2 are average live musicians - and very lazy these days

U2 are only average musicians, but they have rehearsed and played a more extensive repertoire on recent tours than they did in the past.  Where they are, perhaps, lazier, is that most songs on the last three tours sound very similar.

True - however the Boss lives rock n roll whereas U2 are pretenders in the field. This means he rehearses on the job

I agree, some artists, such as Prince, live and breathe music and don't see any separation between work and leisure.  Many others, however, see rock and roll as a job, and often enough, a part time one at that.



Anyone that earns the money they do for an extended time period in this industry views it as a job...no matter who they are

Yeah but some people live their job. U2 do not.

And the evidence for living and U2 not is based on?

The fact that as many as half of the members of U2 can take a break from the band and not touch their instruments for 6 months.

Not gonna happen with Bruce. Not gonna happen with Danny Lanois. Certainly not happening with Prince.

But your evidence for that is what?
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: mattressjedi on April 19, 2012, 02:31:33 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
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
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
Improvising is harder for U2 has they often use visuals - their shows are highly choreographed.

Almost as choreographed as Madonna's Superbowl Half Time show, or Spiderman Turn off the Dark, aren't they?! :-)))))
They just don't put in the hours of work it would take to be able to pull off extra material. Most bands rehearse many more tunes than U2 before they go on tour...

Agreed - Sprinsgteen can pull any song out of the hat because he's always playing, always touring.

To be honest though, while I do share these criticisms of U2, the Springsteen fandom made me feel better because they are all still constantly complaining that he plays too many of the same songs every night, not enough different songs, and neglects certain albums. Which consoled me in the knowledge that EVERY fandom does it. :D

Well, facts are facts - I've seen the Boss play the most obscure songs chosen by fans on the night. They're a really tight band and never stop performing which is why he can do that.

But still, those 'obscure' songs will have been rehearsed.

Quote
U2 are average live musicians - and very lazy these days

U2 are only average musicians, but they have rehearsed and played a more extensive repertoire on recent tours than they did in the past.  Where they are, perhaps, lazier, is that most songs on the last three tours sound very similar.

True - however the Boss lives rock n roll whereas U2 are pretenders in the field. This means he rehearses on the job

I agree, some artists, such as Prince, live and breathe music and don't see any separation between work and leisure.  Many others, however, see rock and roll as a job, and often enough, a part time one at that.



Anyone that earns the money they do for an extended time period in this industry views it as a job...no matter who they are

Yeah but some people live their job. U2 do not.

And the evidence for living and U2 not is based on?

The fact that as many as half of the members of U2 can take a break from the band and not touch their instruments for 6 months.

Not gonna happen with Bruce. Not gonna happen with Danny Lanois. Certainly not happening with Prince.

But your evidence for that is what?

Their own words.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 19, 2012, 02:32:30 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
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
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Improvising is harder for U2 has they often use visuals - their shows are highly choreographed.

Almost as choreographed as Madonna's Superbowl Half Time show, or Spiderman Turn off the Dark, aren't they?! :-)))))
They just don't put in the hours of work it would take to be able to pull off extra material. Most bands rehearse many more tunes than U2 before they go on tour...

Agreed - Sprinsgteen can pull any song out of the hat because he's always playing, always touring.

To be honest though, while I do share these criticisms of U2, the Springsteen fandom made me feel better because they are all still constantly complaining that he plays too many of the same songs every night, not enough different songs, and neglects certain albums. Which consoled me in the knowledge that EVERY fandom does it. :D

Well, facts are facts - I've seen the Boss play the most obscure songs chosen by fans on the night. They're a really tight band and never stop performing which is why he can do that.

But still, those 'obscure' songs will have been rehearsed.

Quote
U2 are average live musicians - and very lazy these days

U2 are only average musicians, but they have rehearsed and played a more extensive repertoire on recent tours than they did in the past.  Where they are, perhaps, lazier, is that most songs on the last three tours sound very similar.

True - however the Boss lives rock n roll whereas U2 are pretenders in the field. This means he rehearses on the job

I agree, some artists, such as Prince, live and breathe music and don't see any separation between work and leisure.  Many others, however, see rock and roll as a job, and often enough, a part time one at that.



Anyone that earns the money they do for an extended time period in this industry views it as a job...no matter who they are

Yeah but some people live their job. U2 do not.

And the evidence for living and U2 not is based on?

The long periods between recording albums and touring, and Bono's time consuming extra curricula activities.   

It's clear that making and playing music isn't on their minds full time.

I believe U2 wouldn't carry on as artists unless they continue to make A LOT of money from their professional activities.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: singnomore on April 19, 2012, 02:33:39 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
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
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Improvising is harder for U2 has they often use visuals - their shows are highly choreographed.

Almost as choreographed as Madonna's Superbowl Half Time show, or Spiderman Turn off the Dark, aren't they?! :-)))))
They just don't put in the hours of work it would take to be able to pull off extra material. Most bands rehearse many more tunes than U2 before they go on tour...

Agreed - Sprinsgteen can pull any song out of the hat because he's always playing, always touring.

To be honest though, while I do share these criticisms of U2, the Springsteen fandom made me feel better because they are all still constantly complaining that he plays too many of the same songs every night, not enough different songs, and neglects certain albums. Which consoled me in the knowledge that EVERY fandom does it. :D

Well, facts are facts - I've seen the Boss play the most obscure songs chosen by fans on the night. They're a really tight band and never stop performing which is why he can do that.

But still, those 'obscure' songs will have been rehearsed.

Quote
U2 are average live musicians - and very lazy these days

U2 are only average musicians, but they have rehearsed and played a more extensive repertoire on recent tours than they did in the past.  Where they are, perhaps, lazier, is that most songs on the last three tours sound very similar.

True - however the Boss lives rock n roll whereas U2 are pretenders in the field. This means he rehearses on the job

I agree, some artists, such as Prince, live and breathe music and don't see any separation between work and leisure.  Many others, however, see rock and roll as a job, and often enough, a part time one at that.



Anyone that earns the money they do for an extended time period in this industry views it as a job...no matter who they are

Yeah but some people live their job. U2 do not.

And the evidence for living and U2 not is based on?

The long periods between recording albums and touring, and Bono's time consuming extra curricula activities.   

It's clear that making and playing music isn't on their minds full time.

I believe U2 wouldn't carry on as artists unless they continue to make A LOT of money from their professional activities.

None of us see them 24/7 365 - so I get the assumption but it cant be claimed as a fact i guess is all I'm suggesting
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: mattressjedi on April 19, 2012, 02:35:59 PM
When they say it themselves I think think it can be taken as fact. I trust them as honest people.

I just think that music comes second to them now. That's understandable. They have families, all of them now. That's good.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 19, 2012, 02:38:29 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
When they say it themselves I think think it can be taken as fact. I trust them as honest people.

I just think that music comes second to them now. That's understandable. They have families, all of them now. That's good.

Radiohead all have families and they're still dedicated to the cause. The Boss too
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: singnomore on April 19, 2012, 02:38:44 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
When they say it themselves I think think it can be taken as fact. I trust them as honest people.

I just think that music comes second to them now. That's understandable. They have families, all of them now. That's good.


Fair point but I guess the music process will vary - Bono talks about walking around with a recorder to catch ideas as they spring to mind (could be entertaining if he's having a chat with the president mind!)  :)
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: singnomore on April 19, 2012, 02:39:43 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
When they say it themselves I think think it can be taken as fact. I trust them as honest people.

I just think that music comes second to them now. That's understandable. They have families, all of them now. That's good.

Radiohead all have families and they're still dedicated to the cause. The Boss too

Still not seeing the arguments you are?
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: mattressjedi on April 19, 2012, 02:41:36 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
When they say it themselves I think think it can be taken as fact. I trust them as honest people.

I just think that music comes second to them now. That's understandable. They have families, all of them now. That's good.

Radiohead all have families and they're still dedicated to the cause. The Boss too

Yeah, that's right. But I'm saying U2 are not as into music as The Boss or the other previously mentioned artists are. That's my point. If they were, family, politics, etc wouldn't get in the way. It would be "get those things outta the way I'm making music".

But U2 aren't like that.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: mattressjedi on April 19, 2012, 02:42:32 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
When they say it themselves I think think it can be taken as fact. I trust them as honest people.

I just think that music comes second to them now. That's understandable. They have families, all of them now. That's good.


Fair point but I guess the music process will vary - Bono talks about walking around with a recorder to catch ideas as they spring to mind (could be entertaining if he's having a chat with the president mind!)  :)

Or semi conscious on a beach in the French Riviera.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 19, 2012, 02:43:48 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
When they say it themselves I think think it can be taken as fact. I trust them as honest people.

I just think that music comes second to them now. That's understandable. They have families, all of them now. That's good.

Radiohead all have families and they're still dedicated to the cause. The Boss too

Yeah, that's right. But I'm saying U2 are not as into music as The Boss or the other previously mentioned artists are. That's my point. If they were, family, politics, etc wouldn't get in the way. It would be "get those things outta the way I'm making music".

But U2 aren't like that.

Oh right I see. Well then they're letting themselves and their long term fans down.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: singnomore on April 19, 2012, 02:46:28 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
When they say it themselves I think think it can be taken as fact. I trust them as honest people.

I just think that music comes second to them now. That's understandable. They have families, all of them now. That's good.

Radiohead all have families and they're still dedicated to the cause. The Boss too

Yeah, that's right. But I'm saying U2 are not as into music as The Boss or the other previously mentioned artists are. That's my point. If they were, family, politics, etc wouldn't get in the way. It would be "get those things outta the way I'm making music".

But U2 aren't like that.

Oh right I see. Well then they're letting themselves and their long term fans down.

As a long term fan I don't feel let down but interested to hear what you mean?
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: mattressjedi on April 19, 2012, 02:48:31 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
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
When they say it themselves I think think it can be taken as fact. I trust them as honest people.

I just think that music comes second to them now. That's understandable. They have families, all of them now. That's good.

Radiohead all have families and they're still dedicated to the cause. The Boss too

Yeah, that's right. But I'm saying U2 are not as into music as The Boss or the other previously mentioned artists are. That's my point. If they were, family, politics, etc wouldn't get in the way. It would be "get those things outta the way I'm making music".

But U2 aren't like that.

Oh right I see. Well then they're letting themselves and their long term fans down.

Well....what you gonna do? It's their lives. Letting fans down is easy. Were' FANatics about it. Fanatics cant be reasoned or argued with. We're right! Don't do this and don't do that! :D

If they walked away and never released another bit of music, I'd be sad for a bit but would get on with it. They've certainly left enough great music for me to enjoy.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 19, 2012, 02:53:06 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
When they say it themselves I think think it can be taken as fact. I trust them as honest people.

I just think that music comes second to them now. That's understandable. They have families, all of them now. That's good.

Radiohead all have families and they're still dedicated to the cause. The Boss too

Yeah, that's right. But I'm saying U2 are not as into music as The Boss or the other previously mentioned artists are. That's my point. If they were, family, politics, etc wouldn't get in the way. It would be "get those things outta the way I'm making music".

But U2 aren't like that.

Oh right I see. Well then they're letting themselves and their long term fans down.

As a long term fan I don't feel let down but interested to hear what you mean?

As someone who's followed them since they started, I feel totally let down by 2000's U2. One puts an emotional investment into a band one has followed for that long.

Aside from the music suffering the sight of bono hanging out with Blair and Bush during the hideous Iraq/Afghanistan debacle made me question what this person was about. I always dug him because he seemed to have ideals - clearly I was wrong.

And don't get me started on them hijacking world events to publicise themselves  ???
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: singnomore on April 19, 2012, 02:59:42 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
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
When they say it themselves I think think it can be taken as fact. I trust them as honest people.

I just think that music comes second to them now. That's understandable. They have families, all of them now. That's good.

Radiohead all have families and they're still dedicated to the cause. The Boss too

Yeah, that's right. But I'm saying U2 are not as into music as The Boss or the other previously mentioned artists are. That's my point. If they were, family, politics, etc wouldn't get in the way. It would be "get those things outta the way I'm making music".

But U2 aren't like that.

Oh right I see. Well then they're letting themselves and their long term fans down.

As a long term fan I don't feel let down but interested to hear what you mean?

As someone who's followed them since they started, I feel totally let down by 2000's U2. One puts an emotional investment into a band one has followed for that long.

Aside from the music suffering the sight of bono hanging out with Blair and Bush during the hideous Iraq/Afghanistan debacle made me question what this person was about. I always dug him because he seemed to have ideals - clearly I was wrong.

And don't get me started on them hijacking world events to publicise themselves  ???


I've followed them from the beginning too - I've had disappointments but cant say I've been let down - I lost the karma so that could be the same thing but I blamed that on Pop at the time  :D
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: mattressjedi on April 19, 2012, 03:07:42 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
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
When they say it themselves I think think it can be taken as fact. I trust them as honest people.

I just think that music comes second to them now. That's understandable. They have families, all of them now. That's good.

Radiohead all have families and they're still dedicated to the cause. The Boss too

Yeah, that's right. But I'm saying U2 are not as into music as The Boss or the other previously mentioned artists are. That's my point. If they were, family, politics, etc wouldn't get in the way. It would be "get those things outta the way I'm making music".

But U2 aren't like that.

Oh right I see. Well then they're letting themselves and their long term fans down.

As a long term fan I don't feel let down but interested to hear what you mean?

As someone who's followed them since they started, I feel totally let down by 2000's U2. One puts an emotional investment into a band one has followed for that long.

Aside from the music suffering the sight of bono hanging out with Blair and Bush during the hideous Iraq/Afghanistan debacle made me question what this person was about. I always dug him because he seemed to have ideals - clearly I was wrong.

And don't get me started on them hijacking world events to publicise themselves  ???


I see and understand what you're saying.

But even U2 are made of people and people do things that upset other people, especially those who have followed them for as long as you have. You can't follow a band of flawed human beings for over 3 decades and not expect to get upset and let down at some point.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 19, 2012, 03:08:55 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
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
When they say it themselves I think think it can be taken as fact. I trust them as honest people.

I just think that music comes second to them now. That's understandable. They have families, all of them now. That's good.

Radiohead all have families and they're still dedicated to the cause. The Boss too

Yeah, that's right. But I'm saying U2 are not as into music as The Boss or the other previously mentioned artists are. That's my point. If they were, family, politics, etc wouldn't get in the way. It would be "get those things outta the way I'm making music".

But U2 aren't like that.

Oh right I see. Well then they're letting themselves and their long term fans down.

As a long term fan I don't feel let down but interested to hear what you mean?

As someone who's followed them since they started, I feel totally let down by 2000's U2. One puts an emotional investment into a band one has followed for that long.

Aside from the music suffering the sight of bono hanging out with Blair and Bush during the hideous Iraq/Afghanistan debacle made me question what this person was about. I always dug him because he seemed to have ideals - clearly I was wrong.

And don't get me started on them hijacking world events to publicise themselves  ???


I've followed them from the beginning too - I've had disappointments but cant say I've been let down - I lost the karma so that could be the same thing but I blamed that on Pop at the time  :D

I always felt what they stood for was as important as the music. I could take the music still being great but them being frauds. Or them not being frauds but the music being rubbish. My sense of they're a bit of both now.

I loved POP! >:( ;D
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 19, 2012, 03:12:03 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
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
When they say it themselves I think think it can be taken as fact. I trust them as honest people.

I just think that music comes second to them now. That's understandable. They have families, all of them now. That's good.

Radiohead all have families and they're still dedicated to the cause. The Boss too

Yeah, that's right. But I'm saying U2 are not as into music as The Boss or the other previously mentioned artists are. That's my point. If they were, family, politics, etc wouldn't get in the way. It would be "get those things outta the way I'm making music".

But U2 aren't like that.

Oh right I see. Well then they're letting themselves and their long term fans down.

As a long term fan I don't feel let down but interested to hear what you mean?

As someone who's followed them since they started, I feel totally let down by 2000's U2. One puts an emotional investment into a band one has followed for that long.

Aside from the music suffering the sight of bono hanging out with Blair and Bush during the hideous Iraq/Afghanistan debacle made me question what this person was about. I always dug him because he seemed to have ideals - clearly I was wrong.

And don't get me started on them hijacking world events to publicise themselves  ???


I see and understand what you're saying.

But even U2 are made of people and people do things that upset other people, especially those who have followed them for as long as you have. You can't follow a band of flawed human beings for over 3 decades and not expect to get upset and let down at some point.

I hear ya. At the end of the day I don't like bonos politics or how he seems to use everything to his own advantage. Or how he seems to think the only way to change things is to 'sleep with the enemy' so to speak.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: singnomore on April 19, 2012, 03:12:39 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
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
When they say it themselves I think think it can be taken as fact. I trust them as honest people.

I just think that music comes second to them now. That's understandable. They have families, all of them now. That's good.

Radiohead all have families and they're still dedicated to the cause. The Boss too

Yeah, that's right. But I'm saying U2 are not as into music as The Boss or the other previously mentioned artists are. That's my point. If they were, family, politics, etc wouldn't get in the way. It would be "get those things outta the way I'm making music".

But U2 aren't like that.

Oh right I see. Well then they're letting themselves and their long term fans down.

As a long term fan I don't feel let down but interested to hear what you mean?

As someone who's followed them since they started, I feel totally let down by 2000's U2. One puts an emotional investment into a band one has followed for that long.

Aside from the music suffering the sight of bono hanging out with Blair and Bush during the hideous Iraq/Afghanistan debacle made me question what this person was about. I always dug him because he seemed to have ideals - clearly I was wrong.

And don't get me started on them hijacking world events to publicise themselves  ???


I've followed them from the beginning too - I've had disappointments but cant say I've been let down - I lost the karma so that could be the same thing but I blamed that on Pop at the time  :D

I always felt what they stood for was as important as the music. I could take the music still being great but them being frauds. Or them not being frauds but the music being rubbish. My sense of they're a bit of both now.

I loved POP! >:( ;D

Or just getting older? I love Pop too by the way (now)  ;)
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: mattressjedi on April 19, 2012, 03:14:54 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
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
When they say it themselves I think think it can be taken as fact. I trust them as honest people.

I just think that music comes second to them now. That's understandable. They have families, all of them now. That's good.

Radiohead all have families and they're still dedicated to the cause. The Boss too

Yeah, that's right. But I'm saying U2 are not as into music as The Boss or the other previously mentioned artists are. That's my point. If they were, family, politics, etc wouldn't get in the way. It would be "get those things outta the way I'm making music".

But U2 aren't like that.

Oh right I see. Well then they're letting themselves and their long term fans down.

As a long term fan I don't feel let down but interested to hear what you mean?

As someone who's followed them since they started, I feel totally let down by 2000's U2. One puts an emotional investment into a band one has followed for that long.

Aside from the music suffering the sight of bono hanging out with Blair and Bush during the hideous Iraq/Afghanistan debacle made me question what this person was about. I always dug him because he seemed to have ideals - clearly I was wrong.

And don't get me started on them hijacking world events to publicise themselves  ???


I've followed them from the beginning too - I've had disappointments but cant say I've been let down - I lost the karma so that could be the same thing but I blamed that on Pop at the time  :D

I always felt what they stood for was as important as the music. I could take the music still being great but them being frauds. Or them not being frauds but the music being rubbish. My sense of they're a bit of both now.


I said it in another thread but name another band that has made better music in their third decade than their first or even second. And I mean band, a group of individuals, not a solo artist.
It's hard enough getting two people to agree on anything. Imagine how tough it is for 4. I'm amazed they haven't made a complete crap album yet.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 19, 2012, 03:20:53 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
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
When they say it themselves I think think it can be taken as fact. I trust them as honest people.

I just think that music comes second to them now. That's understandable. They have families, all of them now. That's good.

Radiohead all have families and they're still dedicated to the cause. The Boss too

Yeah, that's right. But I'm saying U2 are not as into music as The Boss or the other previously mentioned artists are. That's my point. If they were, family, politics, etc wouldn't get in the way. It would be "get those things outta the way I'm making music".

But U2 aren't like that.

Oh right I see. Well then they're letting themselves and their long term fans down.

As a long term fan I don't feel let down but interested to hear what you mean?

As someone who's followed them since they started, I feel totally let down by 2000's U2. One puts an emotional investment into a band one has followed for that long.

Aside from the music suffering the sight of bono hanging out with Blair and Bush during the hideous Iraq/Afghanistan debacle made me question what this person was about. I always dug him because he seemed to have ideals - clearly I was wrong.

And don't get me started on them hijacking world events to publicise themselves  ???


I see and understand what you're saying.

But even U2 are made of people and people do things that upset other people, especially those who have followed them for as long as you have. You can't follow a band of flawed human beings for over 3 decades and not expect to get upset and let down at some point.

I hear ya. At the end of the day I don't like bonos politics or how he seems to use everything to his own advantage. Or how he seems to think the only way to change things is to 'sleep with the enemy' so to speak.

I don't think Bono got into bed with the enemy, but he will flirt.

In many ways, Bono has grown up and realises that to achieve objectives - and not just make speeches - he has deal with people who he may disagree with politically.  Although I think Bono is one mind with Tony Blair and George Bush in paying low taxes.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 19, 2012, 03:21:05 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 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
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
When they say it themselves I think think it can be taken as fact. I trust them as honest people.

I just think that music comes second to them now. That's understandable. They have families, all of them now. That's good.

Radiohead all have families and they're still dedicated to the cause. The Boss too

Yeah, that's right. But I'm saying U2 are not as into music as The Boss or the other previously mentioned artists are. That's my point. If they were, family, politics, etc wouldn't get in the way. It would be "get those things outta the way I'm making music".

But U2 aren't like that.

Oh right I see. Well then they're letting themselves and their long term fans down.

As a long term fan I don't feel let down but interested to hear what you mean?

As someone who's followed them since they started, I feel totally let down by 2000's U2. One puts an emotional investment into a band one has followed for that long.

Aside from the music suffering the sight of bono hanging out with Blair and Bush during the hideous Iraq/Afghanistan debacle made me question what this person was about. I always dug him because he seemed to have ideals - clearly I was wrong.

And don't get me started on them hijacking world events to publicise themselves  ???


I've followed them from the beginning too - I've had disappointments but cant say I've been let down - I lost the karma so that could be the same thing but I blamed that on Pop at the time  :D

I always felt what they stood for was as important as the music. I could take the music still being great but them being frauds. Or them not being frauds but the music being rubbish. My sense of they're a bit of both now.


I said it in another thread but name another band that has made better music in their third decade than their first or even second. And I mean band, a group of individuals, not a solo artist.
It's hard enough getting two people to agree on anything. Imagine how tough it is for 4. I'm amazed they haven't made a complete crap album yet.

They have - NLOTH
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Droo on April 19, 2012, 04:32:13 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
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
When they say it themselves I think think it can be taken as fact. I trust them as honest people.

I just think that music comes second to them now. That's understandable. They have families, all of them now. That's good.

Radiohead all have families and they're still dedicated to the cause. The Boss too

Yeah, that's right. But I'm saying U2 are not as into music as The Boss or the other previously mentioned artists are. That's my point. If they were, family, politics, etc wouldn't get in the way. It would be "get those things outta the way I'm making music".

But U2 aren't like that.

Oh right I see. Well then they're letting themselves and their long term fans down.

As a long term fan I don't feel let down but interested to hear what you mean?

As someone who's followed them since they started, I feel totally let down by 2000's U2. One puts an emotional investment into a band one has followed for that long.

Aside from the music suffering the sight of bono hanging out with Blair and Bush during the hideous Iraq/Afghanistan debacle made me question what this person was about. I always dug him because he seemed to have ideals - clearly I was wrong.

And don't get me started on them hijacking world events to publicise themselves  ???


I've followed them from the beginning too - I've had disappointments but cant say I've been let down - I lost the karma so that could be the same thing but I blamed that on Pop at the time  :D

I always felt what they stood for was as important as the music. I could take the music still being great but them being frauds. Or them not being frauds but the music being rubbish. My sense of they're a bit of both now.


I said it in another thread but name another band that has made better music in their third decade than their first or even second. And I mean band, a group of individuals, not a solo artist.
It's hard enough getting two people to agree on anything. Imagine how tough it is for 4. I'm amazed they haven't made a complete crap album yet.

They have - NLOTH

The frothing continues. Foamy frothy froth.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: mattressjedi on April 19, 2012, 05:32:48 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
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
When they say it themselves I think think it can be taken as fact. I trust them as honest people.

I just think that music comes second to them now. That's understandable. They have families, all of them now. That's good.

Radiohead all have families and they're still dedicated to the cause. The Boss too

Yeah, that's right. But I'm saying U2 are not as into music as The Boss or the other previously mentioned artists are. That's my point. If they were, family, politics, etc wouldn't get in the way. It would be "get those things outta the way I'm making music".

But U2 aren't like that.

Oh right I see. Well then they're letting themselves and their long term fans down.

As a long term fan I don't feel let down but interested to hear what you mean?

As someone who's followed them since they started, I feel totally let down by 2000's U2. One puts an emotional investment into a band one has followed for that long.

Aside from the music suffering the sight of bono hanging out with Blair and Bush during the hideous Iraq/Afghanistan debacle made me question what this person was about. I always dug him because he seemed to have ideals - clearly I was wrong.

And don't get me started on them hijacking world events to publicise themselves  ???


I've followed them from the beginning too - I've had disappointments but cant say I've been let down - I lost the karma so that could be the same thing but I blamed that on Pop at the time  :D

I always felt what they stood for was as important as the music. I could take the music still being great but them being frauds. Or them not being frauds but the music being rubbish. My sense of they're a bit of both now.


I said it in another thread but name another band that has made better music in their third decade than their first or even second. And I mean band, a group of individuals, not a solo artist.
It's hard enough getting two people to agree on anything. Imagine how tough it is for 4. I'm amazed they haven't made a complete crap album yet.

They have - NLOTH

I knew you'd say that but I included that line anyway. :D

If you think every track is crap, then I'm not so sure they could do anything to satisfy you at this point.

And again I ask: what band with three decades behind them made better albums than their first and even second decades?
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Midnight is Where the Day Begins on April 19, 2012, 07:32:48 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
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
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
When they say it themselves I think think it can be taken as fact. I trust them as honest people.

I just think that music comes second to them now. That's understandable. They have families, all of them now. That's good.

Radiohead all have families and they're still dedicated to the cause. The Boss too

Yeah, that's right. But I'm saying U2 are not as into music as The Boss or the other previously mentioned artists are. That's my point. If they were, family, politics, etc wouldn't get in the way. It would be "get those things outta the way I'm making music".

But U2 aren't like that.

Oh right I see. Well then they're letting themselves and their long term fans down.

As a long term fan I don't feel let down but interested to hear what you mean?

As someone who's followed them since they started, I feel totally let down by 2000's U2. One puts an emotional investment into a band one has followed for that long.

Aside from the music suffering the sight of bono hanging out with Blair and Bush during the hideous Iraq/Afghanistan debacle made me question what this person was about. I always dug him because he seemed to have ideals - clearly I was wrong.

And don't get me started on them hijacking world events to publicise themselves  ???


I've followed them from the beginning too - I've had disappointments but cant say I've been let down - I lost the karma so that could be the same thing but I blamed that on Pop at the time  :D

I always felt what they stood for was as important as the music. I could take the music still being great but them being frauds. Or them not being frauds but the music being rubbish. My sense of they're a bit of both now.


I said it in another thread but name another band that has made better music in their third decade than their first or even second. And I mean band, a group of individuals, not a solo artist.
It's hard enough getting two people to agree on anything. Imagine how tough it is for 4. I'm amazed they haven't made a complete crap album yet.

They have - NLOTH

The frothing continues. Foamy frothy froth.

Like a Trenta Caramel Latte?
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Droo on April 19, 2012, 07:45:53 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
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
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
When they say it themselves I think think it can be taken as fact. I trust them as honest people.

I just think that music comes second to them now. That's understandable. They have families, all of them now. That's good.

Radiohead all have families and they're still dedicated to the cause. The Boss too

Yeah, that's right. But I'm saying U2 are not as into music as The Boss or the other previously mentioned artists are. That's my point. If they were, family, politics, etc wouldn't get in the way. It would be "get those things outta the way I'm making music".

But U2 aren't like that.

Oh right I see. Well then they're letting themselves and their long term fans down.

As a long term fan I don't feel let down but interested to hear what you mean?

As someone who's followed them since they started, I feel totally let down by 2000's U2. One puts an emotional investment into a band one has followed for that long.

Aside from the music suffering the sight of bono hanging out with Blair and Bush during the hideous Iraq/Afghanistan debacle made me question what this person was about. I always dug him because he seemed to have ideals - clearly I was wrong.

And don't get me started on them hijacking world events to publicise themselves  ???


I've followed them from the beginning too - I've had disappointments but cant say I've been let down - I lost the karma so that could be the same thing but I blamed that on Pop at the time  :D

I always felt what they stood for was as important as the music. I could take the music still being great but them being frauds. Or them not being frauds but the music being rubbish. My sense of they're a bit of both now.


I said it in another thread but name another band that has made better music in their third decade than their first or even second. And I mean band, a group of individuals, not a solo artist.
It's hard enough getting two people to agree on anything. Imagine how tough it is for 4. I'm amazed they haven't made a complete crap album yet.

They have - NLOTH

The frothing continues. Foamy frothy froth.

Like a Trenta Caramel Latte?

Yes. Of hate.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Midnight is Where the Day Begins on April 19, 2012, 07:54:41 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
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
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
When they say it themselves I think think it can be taken as fact. I trust them as honest people.

I just think that music comes second to them now. That's understandable. They have families, all of them now. That's good.

Radiohead all have families and they're still dedicated to the cause. The Boss too

Yeah, that's right. But I'm saying U2 are not as into music as The Boss or the other previously mentioned artists are. That's my point. If they were, family, politics, etc wouldn't get in the way. It would be "get those things outta the way I'm making music".

But U2 aren't like that.

Oh right I see. Well then they're letting themselves and their long term fans down.

As a long term fan I don't feel let down but interested to hear what you mean?

As someone who's followed them since they started, I feel totally let down by 2000's U2. One puts an emotional investment into a band one has followed for that long.

Aside from the music suffering the sight of bono hanging out with Blair and Bush during the hideous Iraq/Afghanistan debacle made me question what this person was about. I always dug him because he seemed to have ideals - clearly I was wrong.

And don't get me started on them hijacking world events to publicise themselves  ???


I've followed them from the beginning too - I've had disappointments but cant say I've been let down - I lost the karma so that could be the same thing but I blamed that on Pop at the time  :D

I always felt what they stood for was as important as the music. I could take the music still being great but them being frauds. Or them not being frauds but the music being rubbish. My sense of they're a bit of both now.


I said it in another thread but name another band that has made better music in their third decade than their first or even second. And I mean band, a group of individuals, not a solo artist.
It's hard enough getting two people to agree on anything. Imagine how tough it is for 4. I'm amazed they haven't made a complete crap album yet.

They have - NLOTH

The frothing continues. Foamy frothy froth.

Like a Trenta Caramel Latte?

Yes. Of hate.

A hateful latte? Sounds evilly sweet.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: tigerfan41 on April 19, 2012, 11:52:49 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I knew you'd say that but I included that line anyway. :D

If you think every track is crap, then I'm not so sure they could do anything to satisfy you at this point.

And again I ask: what band with three decades behind them made better albums than their first and even second decades?

Exactly. I think this is something some of the "haters" just can't wrap their heads around. It's pretty much impossible for any artist with this sort of longevity to make better music in the third/fourth decade than in the first couple. Springsteen hasn't, the Rolling Stones haven't, and even if the Beatles had stuck around as a band, I doubt they would have been able to, either.

As to the issue of not touring often enough, I can see it both ways. I think it's fantastic that Prince, Springsteen and a number of others are committed to touring and recording new music frequently. But I can also see where artists like U2 might need a break. Touring, even with a couple nights off between gigs (or more) can get hard, no matter how nice your accommodations are. Especially when you have a significant other and kids at home. Who really wants to go weeks or months without seeing their kids?

I can't blame U2 for wanting to take a hiatus, especially now that their kids are growing up and they're getting older themselves. With 30+ years of music under their belts and numerous CDs/tours, they deserve a break and deserve to spend time with their families and pursuing other interests should they choose to do so. It doesn't make them terrible musicians to do that, and it doesn't make them any less "dedicated" to music than others who choose to tour more often. It makes them human. If I were in their shoes, even with how much I love music, I'd do the same thing. In fact, I'm surprised they even did as much touring during the 90s as they did, given the fact that their kids were pretty young back then.

Like someone else said, if U2 were to call it a day now, I'd be sad. But ultimately, I'm just glad they've stuck together for as long as they have and have made a lot of really good/great music during that time. Not many artists can say the same.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 20, 2012, 02:00:55 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I knew you'd say that but I included that line anyway. :D

If you think every track is crap, then I'm not so sure they could do anything to satisfy you at this point.

And again I ask: what band with three decades behind them made better albums than their first and even second decades?

Exactly. I think this is something some of the "haters" just can't wrap their heads around. It's pretty much impossible for any artist with this sort of longevity to make better music in the third/fourth decade than in the first couple. Springsteen hasn't, the Rolling Stones haven't, and even if the Beatles had stuck around as a band, I doubt they would have been able to, either.

As to the issue of not touring often enough, I can see it both ways. I think it's fantastic that Prince, Springsteen and a number of others are committed to touring and recording new music frequently. But I can also see where artists like U2 might need a break. Touring, even with a couple nights off between gigs (or more) can get hard, no matter how nice your accommodations are. Especially when you have a significant other and kids at home. Who really wants to go weeks or months without seeing their kids?

I can't blame U2 for wanting to take a hiatus, especially now that their kids are growing up and they're getting older themselves. With 30+ years of music under their belts and numerous CDs/tours, they deserve a break and deserve to spend time with their families and pursuing other interests should they choose to do so. It doesn't make them terrible musicians to do that, and it doesn't make them any less "dedicated" to music than others who choose to tour more often. It makes them human. If I were in their shoes, even with how much I love music, I'd do the same thing. In fact, I'm surprised they even did as much touring during the 90s as they did, given the fact that their kids were pretty young back then.

Like someone else said, if U2 were to call it a day now, I'd be sad. But ultimately, I'm just glad they've stuck together for as long as they have and have made a lot of really good/great music during that time. Not many artists can say the same.

Oh good Lord, change the record. NLOTH is horribly produced, a complete mess, has some of the worst lyrics bono has written and has the worst song they've ever recorded on it. It's perfectly acceptable for someone to really dislike a record withouth you dismissing them as 'haters'. I'm not suggesting they can go back to their glory days but surely they can do better than that. You're obviously in denial - either that or you've had a sense of humour bypass.

Many artists have stuck together and made great records - look at Coldplay.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 20, 2012, 02:03:04 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 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
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
When they say it themselves I think think it can be taken as fact. I trust them as honest people.

I just think that music comes second to them now. That's understandable. They have families, all of them now. That's good.

Radiohead all have families and they're still dedicated to the cause. The Boss too

Yeah, that's right. But I'm saying U2 are not as into music as The Boss or the other previously mentioned artists are. That's my point. If they were, family, politics, etc wouldn't get in the way. It would be "get those things outta the way I'm making music".

But U2 aren't like that.

Oh right I see. Well then they're letting themselves and their long term fans down.

As a long term fan I don't feel let down but interested to hear what you mean?

As someone who's followed them since they started, I feel totally let down by 2000's U2. One puts an emotional investment into a band one has followed for that long.

Aside from the music suffering the sight of bono hanging out with Blair and Bush during the hideous Iraq/Afghanistan debacle made me question what this person was about. I always dug him because he seemed to have ideals - clearly I was wrong.

And don't get me started on them hijacking world events to publicise themselves  ???


I've followed them from the beginning too - I've had disappointments but cant say I've been let down - I lost the karma so that could be the same thing but I blamed that on Pop at the time  :D

I always felt what they stood for was as important as the music. I could take the music still being great but them being frauds. Or them not being frauds but the music being rubbish. My sense of they're a bit of both now.


I said it in another thread but name another band that has made better music in their third decade than their first or even second. And I mean band, a group of individuals, not a solo artist.
It's hard enough getting two people to agree on anything. Imagine how tough it is for 4. I'm amazed they haven't made a complete crap album yet.

They have - NLOTH

I knew you'd say that but I included that line anyway. :D

If you think every track is crap, then I'm not so sure they could do anything to satisfy you at this point.

And again I ask: what band with three decades behind them made better albums than their first and even second decades?

Every track isn't crap (Breathe, Fez, NLOTH). However 70% of it is (the rest of it). That for me makes it a pretty crap album. Even U2 agree its not very good.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Droo on April 20, 2012, 09:06:25 AM
Since when has U2 agreed it's not very good? They seem to have consistently stood by it, even while expressing disappointment in its commercial performance.

The key word in your post is the "FOR ME" aspect. You have an opinion about it. That's fine. But stop expressing it as if it's objective fact. It's obnoxious.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 20, 2012, 10:04:34 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Since when has U2 agreed it's not very good? They seem to have consistently stood by it, even while expressing disappointment in its commercial performance.

The key word in your post is the "FOR ME" aspect. You have an opinion about it. That's fine. But stop expressing it as if it's objective fact. It's obnoxious.

You're getting aggressive - people do that when they don't like the truth.

Obviously it's my opinion rather than objective fact. I thought we'd got past writing IMO after every post. Clearly not.

As for U2 being disappointed, aside from expressing verbal disapointment they also dropped most of the songs from the live set. A clear indication they didn't believe in the songs.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Midnight is Where the Day Begins on April 20, 2012, 11:23:08 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Since when has U2 agreed it's not very good? They seem to have consistently stood by it, even while expressing disappointment in its commercial performance.

The key word in your post is the "FOR ME" aspect. You have an opinion about it. That's fine. But stop expressing it as if it's objective fact. It's obnoxious.

You're getting aggressive - people do that when they don't like the truth.

Obviously it's my opinion rather than objective fact. I thought we'd got past writing IMO after every post. Clearly not.

As for U2 being disappointed, aside from expressing verbal disapointment they also dropped most of the songs from the live set. A clear indication they didn't believe in the songs.

They're views of the album seem to be solely based on how fans took the album.

In the beginning, there was plenty of support for the album, but once they started to drop songs because of lack of response, you could hear the disappointment when they were asked about how they saw the album.

The only track that they seem to constantly praise is Moment of Surrender. And rightfully so because it happens to be the best track on the album.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 20, 2012, 11:28:07 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
Since when has U2 agreed it's not very good? They seem to have consistently stood by it, even while expressing disappointment in its commercial performance.

The key word in your post is the "FOR ME" aspect. You have an opinion about it. That's fine. But stop expressing it as if it's objective fact. It's obnoxious.

You're getting aggressive - people do that when they don't like the truth.

Obviously it's my opinion rather than objective fact. I thought we'd got past writing IMO after every post. Clearly not.

As for U2 being disappointed, aside from expressing verbal disapointment they also dropped most of the songs from the live set. A clear indication they didn't believe in the songs.

They're views of the album seem to be solely based on how fans took the album.

In the beginning, there was plenty of support for the album, but once they started to drop songs because of lack of response, you could hear the disappointment when they were asked about how they saw the album.

The only track that they seem to constantly praise is Moment of Surrender. And rightfully so because it happens to be the best track on the album.

Exactly - just like POP. The fans don't like it therefore U2 don't like it. It's a totally un rock n roll approach. It's not progressive and it doesn't lead to great art. As evidenced by U2's gradual artistic decline
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Midnight is Where the Day Begins on April 20, 2012, 11:31:28 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 are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Since when has U2 agreed it's not very good? They seem to have consistently stood by it, even while expressing disappointment in its commercial performance.

The key word in your post is the "FOR ME" aspect. You have an opinion about it. That's fine. But stop expressing it as if it's objective fact. It's obnoxious.

You're getting aggressive - people do that when they don't like the truth.

Obviously it's my opinion rather than objective fact. I thought we'd got past writing IMO after every post. Clearly not.

As for U2 being disappointed, aside from expressing verbal disapointment they also dropped most of the songs from the live set. A clear indication they didn't believe in the songs.

They're views of the album seem to be solely based on how fans took the album.

In the beginning, there was plenty of support for the album, but once they started to drop songs because of lack of response, you could hear the disappointment when they were asked about how they saw the album.

The only track that they seem to constantly praise is Moment of Surrender. And rightfully so because it happens to be the best track on the album.

Exactly - just like POP. The fans don't like it therefore U2 don't like it. It's a totally un rock n roll approach. It's not progressive and it doesn't lead to great art. As evidenced by U2's gradual artistic decline

I won't call NLOTH a decline in any sense.

But I don't support how they never take into account how they actually feel about things. They brought in Zooropa and wanted to play it, even if many fans didn't remember it. And they went through with it, and fans embraced the return of the song.

If the band can't show their own support for their own work, how can they expect to make another successful album?
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 20, 2012, 11:38:21 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 are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Since when has U2 agreed it's not very good? They seem to have consistently stood by it, even while expressing disappointment in its commercial performance.

The key word in your post is the "FOR ME" aspect. You have an opinion about it. That's fine. But stop expressing it as if it's objective fact. It's obnoxious.

You're getting aggressive - people do that when they don't like the truth.

Obviously it's my opinion rather than objective fact. I thought we'd got past writing IMO after every post. Clearly not.

As for U2 being disappointed, aside from expressing verbal disapointment they also dropped most of the songs from the live set. A clear indication they didn't believe in the songs.

They're views of the album seem to be solely based on how fans took the album.

In the beginning, there was plenty of support for the album, but once they started to drop songs because of lack of response, you could hear the disappointment when they were asked about how they saw the album.

The only track that they seem to constantly praise is Moment of Surrender. And rightfully so because it happens to be the best track on the album.

Exactly - just like POP. The fans don't like it therefore U2 don't like it. It's a totally un rock n roll approach. It's not progressive and it doesn't lead to great art. As evidenced by U2's gradual artistic decline

I won't call NLOTH a decline in any sense.

But I don't support how they never take into account how they actually feel about things. They brought in Zooropa and wanted to play it, even if many fans didn't remember it. And they went through with it, and fans embraced the return of the song.

If the band can't show their own support for their own work, how can they expect to make another successful album?

Your last 2 points are spot on.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 20, 2012, 11:41:16 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 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
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
When they say it themselves I think think it can be taken as fact. I trust them as honest people.

I just think that music comes second to them now. That's understandable. They have families, all of them now. That's good.

Radiohead all have families and they're still dedicated to the cause. The Boss too

Yeah, that's right. But I'm saying U2 are not as into music as The Boss or the other previously mentioned artists are. That's my point. If they were, family, politics, etc wouldn't get in the way. It would be "get those things outta the way I'm making music".

But U2 aren't like that.

Oh right I see. Well then they're letting themselves and their long term fans down.

As a long term fan I don't feel let down but interested to hear what you mean?

As someone who's followed them since they started, I feel totally let down by 2000's U2. One puts an emotional investment into a band one has followed for that long.

Aside from the music suffering the sight of bono hanging out with Blair and Bush during the hideous Iraq/Afghanistan debacle made me question what this person was about. I always dug him because he seemed to have ideals - clearly I was wrong.

And don't get me started on them hijacking world events to publicise themselves  ???


I've followed them from the beginning too - I've had disappointments but cant say I've been let down - I lost the karma so that could be the same thing but I blamed that on Pop at the time  :D

I always felt what they stood for was as important as the music. I could take the music still being great but them being frauds. Or them not being frauds but the music being rubbish. My sense of they're a bit of both now.


I said it in another thread but name another band that has made better music in their third decade than their first or even second. And I mean band, a group of individuals, not a solo artist.
It's hard enough getting two people to agree on anything. Imagine how tough it is for 4. I'm amazed they haven't made a complete crap album yet.

They have - NLOTH

I knew you'd say that but I included that line anyway. :D

If you think every track is crap, then I'm not so sure they could do anything to satisfy you at this point.

And again I ask: what band with three decades behind them made better albums than their first and even second decades?

Every track isn't crap (Breathe, Fez, NLOTH). However 70% of it is (the rest of it). That for me makes it a pretty crap album. Even U2 agree its not very good.

Cedars, MOS, White as Snow and Magnificent are definitely not 'crap', either musically or lyrically.

Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: tigerfan41 on April 20, 2012, 11:48:39 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

I knew you'd say that but I included that line anyway. :D

If you think every track is crap, then I'm not so sure they could do anything to satisfy you at this point.

And again I ask: what band with three decades behind them made better albums than their first and even second decades?

Exactly. I think this is something some of the "haters" just can't wrap their heads around. It's pretty much impossible for any artist with this sort of longevity to make better music in the third/fourth decade than in the first couple. Springsteen hasn't, the Rolling Stones haven't, and even if the Beatles had stuck around as a band, I doubt they would have been able to, either.

As to the issue of not touring often enough, I can see it both ways. I think it's fantastic that Prince, Springsteen and a number of others are committed to touring and recording new music frequently. But I can also see where artists like U2 might need a break. Touring, even with a couple nights off between gigs (or more) can get hard, no matter how nice your accommodations are. Especially when you have a significant other and kids at home. Who really wants to go weeks or months without seeing their kids?

I can't blame U2 for wanting to take a hiatus, especially now that their kids are growing up and they're getting older themselves. With 30+ years of music under their belts and numerous CDs/tours, they deserve a break and deserve to spend time with their families and pursuing other interests should they choose to do so. It doesn't make them terrible musicians to do that, and it doesn't make them any less "dedicated" to music than others who choose to tour more often. It makes them human. If I were in their shoes, even with how much I love music, I'd do the same thing. In fact, I'm surprised they even did as much touring during the 90s as they did, given the fact that their kids were pretty young back then.

Like someone else said, if U2 were to call it a day now, I'd be sad. But ultimately, I'm just glad they've stuck together for as long as they have and have made a lot of really good/great music during that time. Not many artists can say the same.

Oh good Lord, change the record. NLOTH is horribly produced, a complete mess, has some of the worst lyrics bono has written and has the worst song they've ever recorded on it. It's perfectly acceptable for someone to really dislike a record withouth you dismissing them as 'haters'. I'm not suggesting they can go back to their glory days but surely they can do better than that. You're obviously in denial - either that or you've had a sense of humour bypass.

Many artists have stuck together and made great records - look at Coldplay.

The difference is, Coldplay have only been together, what, 12 years? And their music has already suffered. Perhaps your "point" may be more valid in 10-15 years when Coldplay have been together almost as long as U2.  I don't see anyone proclaiming Mylo as being a brilliant album--like Achtung was for U2 at that stage of their career.

Your opinion about the lyrics is completely subjective. Let me ask you: have you ever written lyrics? Do you know anything about the process behind it? It's not as easy as you think, especially when you've been at it as long as Bono. Also, keep in mind, not all of the lyrics on NLOTH were written by Bono. I believe Edge did at least one or two of the songs (from what I remember of the liner notes) and I think that shows (I want to say it was "Magnificent" and "NLOTH" that he co-wrote with Bono on, and those are two of my least favorite songs lyrically).

Also, the point about the fans not liking NLOTH.......I think that's sort of crap. The album received positive reviews from the critics and many fans (check out any review site like Amazon to see fan reviews) liked the CD. When I first picked it up (on release day) I initially thought it was a very different sound for them....but after a few listens, I warmed up to it. Still an album I listen to regularly today. Judging by reviews and what I've read here/other places, lots of other people feel the same.

I don't think U2 are caught up on the fans "not liking it" so much as they are on the decreased album sales. Thing is, no artist, not even a great band like U2, is capable of selling 10 or 20 million albums nowadays. Digital music has made that impossible. Those days of selling 10 million+ albums are over. For a band like U2, I'm sure that's quite an adjustment, but it's one they must make. And 5 million albums sold is certainly nothing to sneeze at. Not many artists are able to do that now.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Midnight is Where the Day Begins on April 20, 2012, 11:57:50 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 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
Since when has U2 agreed it's not very good? They seem to have consistently stood by it, even while expressing disappointment in its commercial performance.

The key word in your post is the "FOR ME" aspect. You have an opinion about it. That's fine. But stop expressing it as if it's objective fact. It's obnoxious.

You're getting aggressive - people do that when they don't like the truth.

Obviously it's my opinion rather than objective fact. I thought we'd got past writing IMO after every post. Clearly not.

As for U2 being disappointed, aside from expressing verbal disapointment they also dropped most of the songs from the live set. A clear indication they didn't believe in the songs.

They're views of the album seem to be solely based on how fans took the album.

In the beginning, there was plenty of support for the album, but once they started to drop songs because of lack of response, you could hear the disappointment when they were asked about how they saw the album.

The only track that they seem to constantly praise is Moment of Surrender. And rightfully so because it happens to be the best track on the album.

Exactly - just like POP. The fans don't like it therefore U2 don't like it. It's a totally un rock n roll approach. It's not progressive and it doesn't lead to great art. As evidenced by U2's gradual artistic decline

I won't call NLOTH a decline in any sense.

But I don't support how they never take into account how they actually feel about things. They brought in Zooropa and wanted to play it, even if many fans didn't remember it. And they went through with it, and fans embraced the return of the song.

If the band can't show their own support for their own work, how can they expect to make another successful album?

Your last 2 points are spot on.

I will certainly advertise my filling in for Paul McGuinness.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 20, 2012, 01:05:28 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 knew you'd say that but I included that line anyway. :D

If you think every track is crap, then I'm not so sure they could do anything to satisfy you at this point.

And again I ask: what band with three decades behind them made better albums than their first and even second decades?

Exactly. I think this is something some of the "haters" just can't wrap their heads around. It's pretty much impossible for any artist with this sort of longevity to make better music in the third/fourth decade than in the first couple. Springsteen hasn't, the Rolling Stones haven't, and even if the Beatles had stuck around as a band, I doubt they would have been able to, either.

As to the issue of not touring often enough, I can see it both ways. I think it's fantastic that Prince, Springsteen and a number of others are committed to touring and recording new music frequently. But I can also see where artists like U2 might need a break. Touring, even with a couple nights off between gigs (or more) can get hard, no matter how nice your accommodations are. Especially when you have a significant other and kids at home. Who really wants to go weeks or months without seeing their kids?

I can't blame U2 for wanting to take a hiatus, especially now that their kids are growing up and they're getting older themselves. With 30+ years of music under their belts and numerous CDs/tours, they deserve a break and deserve to spend time with their families and pursuing other interests should they choose to do so. It doesn't make them terrible musicians to do that, and it doesn't make them any less "dedicated" to music than others who choose to tour more often. It makes them human. If I were in their shoes, even with how much I love music, I'd do the same thing. In fact, I'm surprised they even did as much touring during the 90s as they did, given the fact that their kids were pretty young back then.

Like someone else said, if U2 were to call it a day now, I'd be sad. But ultimately, I'm just glad they've stuck together for as long as they have and have made a lot of really good/great music during that time. Not many artists can say the same.

Oh good Lord, change the record. NLOTH is horribly produced, a complete mess, has some of the worst lyrics bono has written and has the worst song they've ever recorded on it. It's perfectly acceptable for someone to really dislike a record withouth you dismissing them as 'haters'. I'm not suggesting they can go back to their glory days but surely they can do better than that. You're obviously in denial - either that or you've had a sense of humour bypass.

Many artists have stuck together and made great records - look at Coldplay.

The difference is, Coldplay have only been together, what, 12 years? And their music has already suffered. Perhaps your "point" may be more valid in 10-15 years when Coldplay have been together almost as long as U2.  I don't see anyone proclaiming Mylo as being a brilliant album--like Achtung was for U2 at that stage of their career.

Your opinion about the lyrics is completely subjective. Let me ask you: have you ever written lyrics? Do you know anything about the process behind it? It's not as easy as you think, especially when you've been at it as long as Bono. Also, keep in mind, not all of the lyrics on NLOTH were written by Bono. I believe Edge did at least one or two of the songs (from what I remember of the liner notes) and I think that shows (I want to say it was "Magnificent" and "NLOTH" that he co-wrote with Bono on, and those are two of my least favorite songs lyrically).

Also, the point about the fans not liking NLOTH.......I think that's sort of crap. The album received positive reviews from the critics and many fans (check out any review site like Amazon to see fan reviews) liked the CD. When I first picked it up (on release day) I initially thought it was a very different sound for them....but after a few listens, I warmed up to it. Still an album I listen to regularly today. Judging by reviews and what I've read here/other places, lots of other people feel the same.

I don't think U2 are caught up on the fans "not liking it" so much as they are on the decreased album sales. Thing is, no artist, not even a great band like U2, is capable of selling 10 or 20 million albums nowadays. Digital music has made that impossible. Those days of selling 10 million+ albums are over. For a band like U2, I'm sure that's quite an adjustment, but it's one they must make. And 5 million albums sold is certainly nothing to sneeze at. Not many artists are able to do that now.

Your point about Coldplay is totally subjective. If you don't accept that then you are in no position to be calling other people 'haters' or whatever degoritary term is currently in vogue. Are you on any Coldplay message boards? Are you privy to every Coldplay fans personal feelings about their output? No? Then don't have an opinion on the global appeal of their records.

Lyrics - let's work on the presumption that I haven't written any lyrics. Have you ever had an opinion about a book, a film, an historical event without being an author, filmmaker or say, terrorist? Just because you haven't had first hand experience of something it doesn't mean you can't have an opinion on it. People tend to agree with things that suit them and consider others opinions 'negative' when it doesn't. I know my opinion is subjective - did I say it wasn't?

Regarding reviews of NLOTH - I didn't say every person in the world thought it was crap (unlike your contention regarding Coldplay). I said I thought it was crap. Which it is. In my opinion. Equally, U2 distanced themselves from it too which say more than any illiterate idiot writing an Amazon review or an out of work musician writing for a music paper.

As for sales, you're falling back on that as you don't have a substantial argument. NLOTH will be judged historically in the same way POP was - the fans didn't like it therefore U2 decided they didn't like it. Sometimes you argue it sold well - and sometimes you argue it didn't sell well given market conditions.

Do think about how many holes your arguments have before getting on your high horse.  ::)
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: mattressjedi on April 20, 2012, 01:18:28 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 knew you'd say that but I included that line anyway. :D

If you think every track is crap, then I'm not so sure they could do anything to satisfy you at this point.

And again I ask: what band with three decades behind them made better albums than their first and even second decades?

Exactly. I think this is something some of the "haters" just can't wrap their heads around. It's pretty much impossible for any artist with this sort of longevity to make better music in the third/fourth decade than in the first couple. Springsteen hasn't, the Rolling Stones haven't, and even if the Beatles had stuck around as a band, I doubt they would have been able to, either.

As to the issue of not touring often enough, I can see it both ways. I think it's fantastic that Prince, Springsteen and a number of others are committed to touring and recording new music frequently. But I can also see where artists like U2 might need a break. Touring, even with a couple nights off between gigs (or more) can get hard, no matter how nice your accommodations are. Especially when you have a significant other and kids at home. Who really wants to go weeks or months without seeing their kids?

I can't blame U2 for wanting to take a hiatus, especially now that their kids are growing up and they're getting older themselves. With 30+ years of music under their belts and numerous CDs/tours, they deserve a break and deserve to spend time with their families and pursuing other interests should they choose to do so. It doesn't make them terrible musicians to do that, and it doesn't make them any less "dedicated" to music than others who choose to tour more often. It makes them human. If I were in their shoes, even with how much I love music, I'd do the same thing. In fact, I'm surprised they even did as much touring during the 90s as they did, given the fact that their kids were pretty young back then.

Like someone else said, if U2 were to call it a day now, I'd be sad. But ultimately, I'm just glad they've stuck together for as long as they have and have made a lot of really good/great music during that time. Not many artists can say the same.

Oh good Lord, change the record. NLOTH is horribly produced, a complete mess, has some of the worst lyrics bono has written and has the worst song they've ever recorded on it. It's perfectly acceptable for someone to really dislike a record withouth you dismissing them as 'haters'. I'm not suggesting they can go back to their glory days but surely they can do better than that. You're obviously in denial - either that or you've had a sense of humour bypass.

Many artists have stuck together and made great records - look at Coldplay.

Pot. Meet Black Kettle.

Coldplay rules*skip*Coldplay rules*skip*Coldplay rules*skip*   ;D
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 20, 2012, 01:24:22 PM
I have a low opinion of the opinion of anyone who regards the NLOTH album as 'crap'.  Unless they're exaggerating for effect.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 20, 2012, 01:29:14 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I have a low opinion of the opinion of anyone who regards the NLOTH album as 'crap'.  Unless they're exaggerating for effect.

I love you - love conquers all. It's all we have left. Anyone will tell you that
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Droo on April 20, 2012, 01:46:35 PM
I would rather listen to the very worst U2 song/album ever than have to listen to Coldplay for any extended period of time.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 20, 2012, 02:11:18 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I would rather listen to the very worst U2 song/album ever than have to listen to Coldplay for any extended period of time.

Then you have cloth ears and a shockingly limited musical vocabulary.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Droo on April 20, 2012, 02:13:41 PM
Coldplay are the ones with a shockingly limited musical vocabulary.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 20, 2012, 02:19:50 PM
Coldplay have made some pretty good albums and some good to great songs.  They are also a very good live band, who could play a North American stadium tour if they choose to.  And I'm not even a fan.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 20, 2012, 02:23:43 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Coldplay are the ones with a shockingly limited musical vocabulary.

Either way you are the one with cloth ears
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: singnomore on April 20, 2012, 03:25:23 PM
This is a Pop thread yeah?
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: mattressjedi on April 20, 2012, 04:30:28 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
This is a Pop thread yeah?

It is?
I thought it was about Coldplay, selling stadiums and people's ears? :p

I think The Edge tossing his guitar down in disgust after playing Gone on the live Elevation DVD says it all about how the band still feel about those POP songs.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: tigerfan41 on April 20, 2012, 05:26:10 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
This is a Pop thread yeah?

It is?
I thought it was about Coldplay, selling stadiums and people's ears? :p

I think The Edge tossing his guitar down in disgust after playing Gone on the live Elevation DVD says it all about how the band still feel about those POP songs.

Yeah, like the other 3 or 4 recent threads that evolved into a Coldplay/U2 battle.  :P As if Coldplay can even be fairly compared to a legendary band like U2 at this point.....maybe in 10-20 years if Coldplay manages to stick around that long.

I've never seen that DVD. Now I need to.  ;) However, wasn't that shot like 10 years ago? Perhaps they're not so disgusted with Pop anymore. Maybe it's grown on them.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 20, 2012, 05:27:48 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
This is a Pop thread yeah?

It is?
I thought it was about Coldplay, selling stadiums and people's ears? :p

I think The Edge tossing his guitar down in disgust after playing Gone on the live Elevation DVD says it all about how the band still feel about those POP songs.

I think The Edge was expressing disgust at what they'd turned Gone into on the Elevation tour.

Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: The Unknown Caller on April 20, 2012, 06:46:16 PM
Probably worth noting that U2 'distanced themselves' from it only when returning to the tour seventeen months after it came out. That is a very long time (Longer than the entire PopMart Tour!), and came after a significant gap. I think most fans believe that they would have played more NLOTH material if the tour had resumed on schedule in the USA in early 2010.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Droo on April 20, 2012, 07:00:23 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Coldplay are the ones with a shockingly limited musical vocabulary.

Either way you are the one with cloth ears

Oh dear. I'm devastated. Your opinion means ever so much to me.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: tigerfan41 on April 20, 2012, 07:06:24 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Probably worth noting that U2 'distanced themselves' from it only when returning to the tour seventeen months after it came out. That is a very long time (Longer than the entire PopMart Tour!), and came after a significant gap. I think most fans believe that they would have played more NLOTH material if the tour had resumed on schedule in the USA in early 2010.

Yep. There's no doubt in my mind that had the NLOTH tour finished out in 2010 as originally planned, U2 would have continued to promote it by playing several songs off the CD each night. Almost two years after the release of NLOTH, it didn't make much sense to continue promoting it.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 20, 2012, 07:22:50 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Probably worth noting that U2 'distanced themselves' from it only when returning to the tour seventeen months after it came out. That is a very long time (Longer than the entire PopMart Tour!), and came after a significant gap. I think most fans believe that they would have played more NLOTH material if the tour had resumed on schedule in the USA in early 2010.

Yep. There's no doubt in my mind that had the NLOTH tour finished out in 2010 as originally planned, U2 would have continued to promote it by playing several songs off the CD each night. Almost two years after the release of NLOTH, it didn't make much sense to continue promoting it.

I wonder why U2 bothered promoting Achtung Baby all the way down the yellow brick road to Sydney, Australia, y'all.

Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: tigerfan41 on April 20, 2012, 08:40:47 PM
Difference is that Achtung was a smash success at the time of release and considered to be perhaps their greatest CD. NLOTH, as much as I like it, was not the same smash success as Achtung.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 21, 2012, 12:40:05 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
Coldplay are the ones with a shockingly limited musical vocabulary.

Either way you are the one with cloth ears

Oh dear. I'm devastated. Your opinion means ever so much to me.

My opinion obviously means something or you wouldn't have responded to my posts  ???
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 21, 2012, 12:41:28 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
This is a Pop thread yeah?

It is?
I thought it was about Coldplay, selling stadiums and people's ears? :p

I think The Edge tossing his guitar down in disgust after playing Gone on the live Elevation DVD says it all about how the band still feel about those POP songs.

I think it was the edge trying to be rock n roll rather than pretending to be disgussted with the song.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 21, 2012, 01:03:06 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Probably worth noting that U2 'distanced themselves' from it only when returning to the tour seventeen months after it came out. That is a very long time (Longer than the entire PopMart Tour!), and came after a significant gap. I think most fans believe that they would have played more NLOTH material if the tour had resumed on schedule in the USA in early 2010.

Yep. There's no doubt in my mind that had the NLOTH tour finished out in 2010 as originally planned, U2 would have continued to promote it by playing several songs off the CD each night. Almost two years after the release of NLOTH, it didn't make much sense to continue promoting it.

Young man, you should get your facts straight before having an opinion on something. There were 6 legs on the 360 tour. By the 3rd leg, they had given up playing a song from NLOTH as the opener (unheard of for nearly every previous tour). On legs 1 and 2 they were averaging 7 or 8 songs from NLOTH. By the 3rd leg they were averaging 3 or 4 songs from NLOTH.

Leg 1 ran from 30th June 2009 to 22nd August 2009 - 1 and a half months
Leg 2 ran from 12th September 2009 to 28th October 2009 - 1 and a half months
Leg 3 ran from 6th August 2010 to 8th October 2010 - 2 months
Leg 4 ran from November 25th 2010 to 19th December 2010 - nearly 2 months
Leg 5 ran from 25th March 2011 to 13th April - half a month
Leg 6 ran from 11th May 2011 to 30th July 2011 - 2 and a half months

You can clearly see they spent 3 months of touring 'promoting' NLOTH and 6 and a half months worth of touring distancing themselves from it.

As for UC's contention that they started distancing themselves from it 1 and a half years after it came out, as you can see, that isn't true either. They were playing pretty much the same setlist from December 2010 to July 2011 as they had been from leg 3 onwards (ie averaging 3 or 4 tunes a night from NLOTH and nothing from that record as an opener).

These aren't my opinions - they're facts


Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: wraitii on April 21, 2012, 01:24:48 AM
Actually... What UC said is true. Leg 3 IS about 1.5 years after NLOTH's release.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 21, 2012, 01:29:22 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Actually... What UC said is true. Leg 3 IS about 1.5 years after NLOTH's release.

In tems of calendar months, yes - in tems of time spent touring, no. Which is the point.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: singnomore on April 21, 2012, 01:30:24 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
Probably worth noting that U2 'distanced themselves' from it only when returning to the tour seventeen months after it came out. That is a very long time (Longer than the entire PopMart Tour!), and came after a significant gap. I think most fans believe that they would have played more NLOTH material if the tour had resumed on schedule in the USA in early 2010.

Yep. There's no doubt in my mind that had the NLOTH tour finished out in 2010 as originally planned, U2 would have continued to promote it by playing several songs off the CD each night. Almost two years after the release of NLOTH, it didn't make much sense to continue promoting it.

I wonder why U2 bothered promoting Achtung Baby all the way down the yellow brick road to Sydney, Australia, y'all.



Depends on your view - the album was a success but the tour was so far ahead of its time that the tour format of ZooV sustained that tour as much as the album
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: singnomore on April 21, 2012, 01:31:30 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Actually... What UC said is true. Leg 3 IS about 1.5 years after NLOTH's release.

In tems of calendar months, yes - in tems of time spent touring, no. Which is the point.

Does that mean your actually agreeing with each other then?  ;)
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 21, 2012, 01:32:03 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
Actually... What UC said is true. Leg 3 IS about 1.5 years after NLOTH's release.

In tems of calendar months, yes - in tems of time spent touring, no. Which is the point.

Does that mean your actually agreeing with each other then?  ;)

No!  ::) >:( ;D
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: tigerfan41 on April 21, 2012, 01:33:01 AM
^ Exactly, wraitii. Leg 3 was roughly 1.5 years after NLOTH's release. Leg 3 is also when the band began to slip out the majority of the NLOTH songs they were playing in favor of the older songs. There's nothing fictitious about that.

And I'm pretty sure when most look at a tour, they view it as calendar months, not this BS about time spent touring. It makes no sense to promote a CD 1.5 years (calendar years since we have to specify that, apparently) after its release when you have a whole catalog of other songs people want to hear. Unless the CD was a smash success (like Achtung) it doesn't make sense to have 4-6 songs from the CD in the setlist. I doubt if Springsteen will be playing as many songs from Wrecking Ball in a year and a half.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: singnomore on April 21, 2012, 01:36:00 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 are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Actually... What UC said is true. Leg 3 IS about 1.5 years after NLOTH's release.

In tems of calendar months, yes - in tems of time spent touring, no. Which is the point.

Does that mean your actually agreeing with each other then?  ;)

No!  ::) >:( ;D

 ;D
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: singnomore on April 21, 2012, 01:37:20 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
^ Exactly, wraitii. Leg 3 was roughly 1.5 years after NLOTH's release. Leg 3 is also when the band began to slip out the majority of the NLOTH songs they were playing in favor of the older songs. There's nothing fictitious about that.

And I'm pretty sure when most look at a tour, they view it as calendar months, not this BS about time spent touring. It makes no sense to promote a CD 1.5 years (calendar years since we have to specify that, apparently) after its release when you have a whole catalog of other songs people want to hear. Unless the CD was a smash success (like Achtung) it doesn't make sense to have 4-6 songs from the CD in the setlist. I doubt if Springsteen will be playing as many songs from Wrecking Ball in a year and a half.

Still think the tour format carried the songs just as much - and yes debating calendar months versus overall time doesn't really matter - U2 strayed away from NLOTH as the tour went on
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 21, 2012, 01:39:42 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
^ Exactly, wraitii. Leg 3 was roughly 1.5 years after NLOTH's release. Leg 3 is also when the band began to slip out the majority of the NLOTH songs they were playing in favor of the older songs. There's nothing fictitious about that.

And I'm pretty sure when most look at a tour, they view it as calendar months, not this BS about time spent touring. It makes no sense to promote a CD 1.5 years (calendar years since we have to specify that, apparently) after its release when you have a whole catalog of other songs people want to hear. Unless the CD was a smash success (like Achtung) it doesn't make sense to have 4-6 songs from the CD in the setlist. I doubt if Springsteen will be playing as many songs from Wrecking Ball in a year and a half.

There was a 10 month gap between legs 2 and 3 and another 3 month gap between legs 5 and 6 meaning they spent well over half of a 2 year tour cycle playing no gigs at all. I think it would be fair to say calendar months are irrelevant in this context.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 21, 2012, 01:40:38 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
^ Exactly, wraitii. Leg 3 was roughly 1.5 years after NLOTH's release. Leg 3 is also when the band began to slip out the majority of the NLOTH songs they were playing in favor of the older songs. There's nothing fictitious about that.

And I'm pretty sure when most look at a tour, they view it as calendar months, not this BS about time spent touring. It makes no sense to promote a CD 1.5 years (calendar years since we have to specify that, apparently) after its release when you have a whole catalog of other songs people want to hear. Unless the CD was a smash success (like Achtung) it doesn't make sense to have 4-6 songs from the CD in the setlist. I doubt if Springsteen will be playing as many songs from Wrecking Ball in a year and a half.

Still think the tour format carried the songs just as much - and yes debating calendar months versus overall time doesn't really matter - U2 strayed away from NLOTH as the tour went on

There was a 10 month gap between legs 2 and 3 and another 3 month gap between legs 5 and 6 meaning they spent well over half of a 2 year tour cycle playing no gigs at all. I think it would be fair to say calendar months are irrelevant in this context.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: wraitii on April 21, 2012, 05:02:32 AM
They did, but with Bono's back... I really think the third leg is clearly separated from the rest.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Sugarcube on April 21, 2012, 05:10:28 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
They did, but with Bono's back... I really think the third leg is clearly separated from the rest.

Either way, it doesnt change the fact that they spent way more time distancing themselves from NLOTH than they did promoting it. Any arguments that the album was gradually fazed out are redundant in the light if these facts.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: wraitii on April 21, 2012, 07:27:40 AM
True, NLOTH was basically scraped. I'm really not sure the 360 tour can be called a best-of tour for many reasons, and anyway, I really dug the setlists we had.

We've gotten really off-track here.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: tigerfan41 on April 21, 2012, 10:41:38 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
^ Exactly, wraitii. Leg 3 was roughly 1.5 years after NLOTH's release. Leg 3 is also when the band began to slip out the majority of the NLOTH songs they were playing in favor of the older songs. There's nothing fictitious about that.

And I'm pretty sure when most look at a tour, they view it as calendar months, not this BS about time spent touring. It makes no sense to promote a CD 1.5 years (calendar years since we have to specify that, apparently) after its release when you have a whole catalog of other songs people want to hear. Unless the CD was a smash success (like Achtung) it doesn't make sense to have 4-6 songs from the CD in the setlist. I doubt if Springsteen will be playing as many songs from Wrecking Ball in a year and a half.

Still think the tour format carried the songs just as much - and yes debating calendar months versus overall time doesn't really matter - U2 strayed away from NLOTH as the tour went on

Yep, and no one is disputing that fact. It's a shame but understandable in many ways. Hopefully the next album will get properly promoted throughout the next tour.

Anyway, back to the actual topic of the thread. Honestly, with how much Pop I've been listening to the past couple weeks, I wouldn't mind them ditching a few of the more well-known songs in favor of stuff off Pop. Don't think they'll do it, but it'd still be nice
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Midnight is Where the Day Begins on April 21, 2012, 10:46:01 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
^ Exactly, wraitii. Leg 3 was roughly 1.5 years after NLOTH's release. Leg 3 is also when the band began to slip out the majority of the NLOTH songs they were playing in favor of the older songs. There's nothing fictitious about that.

And I'm pretty sure when most look at a tour, they view it as calendar months, not this BS about time spent touring. It makes no sense to promote a CD 1.5 years (calendar years since we have to specify that, apparently) after its release when you have a whole catalog of other songs people want to hear. Unless the CD was a smash success (like Achtung) it doesn't make sense to have 4-6 songs from the CD in the setlist. I doubt if Springsteen will be playing as many songs from Wrecking Ball in a year and a half.

Still think the tour format carried the songs just as much - and yes debating calendar months versus overall time doesn't really matter - U2 strayed away from NLOTH as the tour went on

Yep, and no one is disputing that fact. It's a shame but understandable in many ways. Hopefully the next album will get properly promoted throughout the next tour.

Anyway, back to the actual topic of the thread. Honestly, with how much Pop I've been listening to the past couple weeks, I wouldn't mind them ditching a few of the more well-known songs in favor of stuff off Pop. Don't think they'll do it, but it'd still be nice

I'm not only wanting Pop this time around, but expecting it.

I remember Bono making remarks about bringing Pop songs back into the setlist for the next tour. A flurry of snippets on I'll Go Crazy wasn't enough for me.  :D

But things like swapping Please for Sunday Bloody Sunday etc. would be nice changes.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Droo on April 21, 2012, 10:50:49 AM
Why they didn't rotate I'll Go Crazy and Sunday Bloody Sunday some nights with Discotheque and Please is something I'll never understand. 
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: tigerfan41 on April 21, 2012, 10:56:03 AM
I'd even be OK with them ditching MW for Discotheque. I'm kind of burnt out on MW. And a SBS swap out for Please would be amazing. Or even IGWSHA or DYFL. I'd even be fine with a Mofo for The Fly replacement.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 21, 2012, 12:27:12 PM
Please, Mofo and Gone would be the best live songs from Pop.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: tigerfan41 on April 21, 2012, 12:47:38 PM
I kind of want Staring At The Sun, too. Though I think I'd prefer them to do it acoustically like Stay was on 360.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Droo on April 21, 2012, 12:54:36 PM
Since they were able to pull off Zooropa live, I suggest it's time to bring back Do You Feel Loved.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: tigerfan41 on April 21, 2012, 01:07:09 PM
^ Agreed. Love that song.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: mattressjedi on April 21, 2012, 01:38:09 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
^ Exactly, wraitii. Leg 3 was roughly 1.5 years after NLOTH's release. Leg 3 is also when the band began to slip out the majority of the NLOTH songs they were playing in favor of the older songs. There's nothing fictitious about that.

And I'm pretty sure when most look at a tour, they view it as calendar months, not this BS about time spent touring. It makes no sense to promote a CD 1.5 years (calendar years since we have to specify that, apparently) after its release when you have a whole catalog of other songs people want to hear. Unless the CD was a smash success (like Achtung) it doesn't make sense to have 4-6 songs from the CD in the setlist. I doubt if Springsteen will be playing as many songs from Wrecking Ball in a year and a half.

Still think the tour format carried the songs just as much - and yes debating calendar months versus overall time doesn't really matter - U2 strayed away from NLOTH as the tour went on

I agree with this. ZooTV and the music worked well together.

Besides, what else would they play?

They were bolder back than and said: were not playing any pre-War songs whatsoever.

Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Tumbling Dice on April 21, 2012, 04:11:34 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
^ Exactly, wraitii. Leg 3 was roughly 1.5 years after NLOTH's release. Leg 3 is also when the band began to slip out the majority of the NLOTH songs they were playing in favor of the older songs. There's nothing fictitious about that.

And I'm pretty sure when most look at a tour, they view it as calendar months, not this BS about time spent touring. It makes no sense to promote a CD 1.5 years (calendar years since we have to specify that, apparently) after its release when you have a whole catalog of other songs people want to hear. Unless the CD was a smash success (like Achtung) it doesn't make sense to have 4-6 songs from the CD in the setlist. I doubt if Springsteen will be playing as many songs from Wrecking Ball in a year and a half.

Still think the tour format carried the songs just as much - and yes debating calendar months versus overall time doesn't really matter - U2 strayed away from NLOTH as the tour went on

I agree with this. ZooTV and the music worked well together.

Besides, what else would they play?

They were bolder back than and said: were not playing any pre-War songs whatsoever.


On Zoo TV, the new songs from AB were even better live songs than the oldies.  You can't say that about any tour since PopMart.

Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: tigerfan41 on April 21, 2012, 09:52:46 PM
^ Good point. And I like/love most of the 00's U2, but there's no disputing the band peaked with Achtung/Zoo. And the songs on Achtung were a perfect fit for Zoo TV.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: singnomore on April 22, 2012, 12:11:05 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Why they didn't rotate I'll Go Crazy and Sunday Bloody Sunday some nights with Discotheque and Please is something I'll never understand. 

I think for me this is where perhaps the scale of the tour limited them. A wee bit like ZooTV eventually they kept a fairly static show as this was driven as much about the visual element. Same happened with the 360 shows - the amount of money they were paying daily just to use as a normal video screen probably didn't justify the cost i guess.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: spooked1oo on April 22, 2012, 01:33:55 AM
So, I watched some of Popmart Mexico City tonight, and it made me kind of mad. I realized that Popmart was the ONLY time we've ever heard Last Night On Earth, Discotheque (with boom-cha's; not a snippet), Mofo, Do you Feel Loved, If You Wear That Velevet Dress, Miami (no complaints there) and IGWSHA live. That's madness! Pop is arguably the second-best U2 album for live tracks, and we've hardly heard them! It absolutely blows my mind why we didn't get Mofo during 360; it woul have worked perfectly with that stage and the atmosphere it could create! Madness!
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: markreed on April 22, 2012, 07:06:25 AM
In case anyone wonders, when asked about Gone at Boston, Edge says he was angry with the very poor sound he was getting in his monitors and lost his temper.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: mattressjedi on April 23, 2012, 02:57:02 PM
yeah that's what it really was. I was just goofing about how much they hate POP so I threw that in as an example.

"I hate this song! Still sucks!"

[slams guitar down and kicks it]
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: spooked1oo on April 23, 2012, 10:59:19 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
yeah that's what it really was. I was just goofing about how much they hate POP so I threw that in as an example.

"I hate this song! Still sucks!"

[slams guitar down and kicks it]

More like-

"Why did we not play Mofo!?"
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: mattressjedi on April 24, 2012, 11:54:25 AM
Good question. They thought that song was a perfect synthesis of what they were trying to do with POP so why they don't play it more is a ?
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: JonD on June 01, 2012, 04:10:14 PM
This is just theory and I have little evidence to back it up, but maybe they skip Pop because the band focus upon their more popular songs that span the decades.  If they showcase 6-7 new album songs + 5-6 80s songs + 5-6 90s + 5-6 2000s then it doesn't leave much room for what they perceive as a "failure".

Hopefully I am incorrect as Pop is one of my favourite U2 albums and Popmart (Toronto) was incredible! At least I have the memories :-). Btw the elevation ( or vertigo?) live version of discotheque was amazing.

Jon
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Tumbling Dice on June 01, 2012, 04:58:41 PM
Because Pop was a commercial failure.

Cheers,

TD.

Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Domenico of Lovetown on June 01, 2012, 08:52:09 PM
15 years ago tonight I was attending a PopMart show.

Time flies.

The real question is why are the Batman Forever Soundtrack and Original Soundtracks 1 still feeding setlists?
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Droo on June 01, 2012, 10:42:50 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
15 years ago tonight I was attending a PopMart show.

Time flies.

The real question is why are the Batman Forever Soundtrack and Original Soundtracks 1 still feeding setlists?

Because Miss Sarajevo and HMTMKMKM are awesome songs?
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Domenico of Lovetown on June 03, 2012, 10:58:48 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
15 years ago tonight I was attending a PopMart show.

Time flies.

The real question is why are the Batman Forever Soundtrack and Original Soundtracks 1 still feeding setlists?

Because Miss Sarajevo and HMTMKMKM are awesome songs?


Miss Sarajevo and HMTMKMKM, to me, represent the same late 1990's period for the band.  They had about the same impact as any single from Pop.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Kurukira on June 03, 2012, 12:02:41 PM
I'd just be happy if any song from Pop is played live....and not as a snippet.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: markreed on June 06, 2012, 01:41:04 PM
How can anyone say that the "pop" period hasn't given them some of their best songs baffles me. "Please" is one of the finest songs they've ever done. They blame "Pop" for the fact they went into stadiums in the middle of a recession for the second time in less than six months, and wonder why they didn't sell any tickets when plenty of people couldn't afford food.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Tumbling Dice on June 06, 2012, 02:22:39 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
How can anyone say that the "pop" period hasn't given them some of their best songs baffles me. "Please" is one of the finest songs they've ever done. They blame "Pop" for the fact they went into stadiums in the middle of a recession for the second time in less than six months, and wonder why they didn't sell any tickets when plenty of people couldn't afford food.

That didn't stop them flogging oodles of tickets at extortionate prices during a decession on the last tour.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: markreed on June 06, 2012, 03:08:10 PM
That was then, this is now.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: markreed on June 06, 2012, 04:10:00 PM
More accurately, in 1997 U2 played 44 US stadium shows with only 110 days gap between the two legs. For 360 the band play 49 stadium shows with an 500+ day gap between the shows. No wonder, with almost two years between shows, they sold far better than in a saturated market.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: yew2 on June 07, 2012, 03:18:54 PM
Yes sadly ,the only repeats of the Popmart tour I am likely to see are when I stick the DVD of the Mexico date in my DVD player.

Visually amazing   Concert and a great performance , I just wish they weren't so embarrassed by it .

In fact , similar to a post someone else made, 15 yrs ago tomorrow I was seeing the Popmart show in Philadelphia. If I remember   correctly they were supported by Fun Loving Criminals. Wonder if any members here were at that show ...

At the time I lived in the US. I am British and have since seen the Elevation tour in London Earls Court and the Vertigo tour at Croke Park Dublin.

I loved NLOTH and was obsessed with it , I never made it to a 360 show unfortunately as all their shows were at least 100 miles away from me.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Kurukira on June 08, 2012, 12:29:48 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Yes sadly ,the only repeats of the Popmart tour I am likely to see are when I stick the DVD of the Mexico date in my DVD player.

Visually amazing   Concert and a great performance , I just wish they weren't so embarrassed by it .

In fact , similar to a post someone else made, 15 yrs ago tomorrow I was seeing the Popmart show in Philadelphia. If I remember   correctly they were supported by Fun Loving Criminals. Wonder if any members here were at that show ...


I was at that show, it was my first live U2 Experience - the seat I had was WAY RIGHT and the only way I could see the band (watching that big screen gets tiresome and it's NOT what you paid for) was to stand.  But you are right, I remember seeing the Fun Loving Criminals open, then Howie B's mix.  Let me see, it was one of the first few times I went out on my own without chaperones or supervision (just out of high school) and I had a T-shirt on that said "Complete Rebel" in the style of the Calvin Klein logos, haha.

I was so nervous, but it was quite fun.  My only wish was that they would have added another show in Philly on the 2nd US leg.  They did that for Zoo TV and Vertigo, but not for Popmart nor 360 (it was understandable in that case because of Bono's back drama)...
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: yew2 on June 08, 2012, 06:35:22 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I was at that show, it was my first live U2 Experience - the seat I had was WAY RIGHT and the only way I could see the band (watching that big screen gets tiresome and it's NOT what you paid for) was to stand.  But you are right, I remember seeing the Fun Loving Criminals open, then Howie B's mix. 

Hi fellow Popmartian :-)  I got a cab to the venue, it was a nice summer late afternoon but I got a little nippy as the sun went down waiting for the show to start. I remember when it pulled up and I walked the road, cars arriving with fans playing U2 loud with their windows down.

Not only was it my first U2 concert but my first stadium rock concert. I discovered U2 through the Pop album which I already owned, up until Pop I hadn't paid them any real attention. I then bought Zooropa and loved that too.

I was sat way at the back, so although I could see the screen and stage head on, it was almost as far away as you could get.

I was lucky, i had no idea they were performing in Philly till I saw an advert in an elevator where i was staying , someone selling their tickets on for face value. The rest is history.

Thanks for posting !
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: soloyan on June 10, 2012, 02:53:25 AM
Not sure it has been posted - couldn't read the whole 15 pages - but to me this alone is proof U2 could get back to POP from time to time...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWm6Va0Cpyc&feature=related

AMAZING live tune !!!
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: satellitedog01 on July 01, 2012, 09:44:39 AM
That version sucks. It's empty, boring and Larry's lack of enthusiasm is grating.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: singnomore on July 02, 2012, 03:57:13 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
That version sucks. It's empty, boring and Larry's lack of enthusiasm is grating.

As a song it probably has to have a moment in time (Popmart) or as you say everyone engaged in playing it!
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: gypsyheart75 on July 19, 2012, 04:18:23 AM
I'd love to see them play around with an acoustic version of Do You Feel Loved. No real reason - just would love to hear Edge interpret it differently.

Gone and MoFo are some of Adam and Larry's finest work - it would be lovely to see them showcase those two songs again.

As for Please - that song, live in Dublin, Popmart, 1997 - shivers. That change from Bullet to Please to Streets was ah-mazing!

If God Will Send His Angels would be a nice surprise.

Pop nostalgia...
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: bethere on August 19, 2012, 05:20:11 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
8 million sold = flop.

wow...

          Actually it was 5.5 million and eventually reached 6 million.  The 7 million and 8 million figures are exagerations or over estimates.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: eddyjedi on September 23, 2012, 09:19:19 AM
I think the please-streets segue was one of the finest moments ever from the band. The Rotterdam please ep was phenomenal.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: KenpoMatt on October 07, 2012, 10:02:16 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Because Pop was a commercial failure.

Cheers,

TD.


I wonder if I'm the only one who caught your wit, well played.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: xy on October 12, 2012, 01:51:54 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
How can anyone say that the "pop" period hasn't given them some of their best songs baffles me. "Please" is one of the finest songs they've ever done. They blame "Pop" for the fact they went into stadiums in the middle of a recession for the second time in less than six months, and wonder why they didn't sell any tickets when plenty of people couldn't afford food.

That didn't stop them flogging oodles of tickets at extortionate prices during a decession on the last tour.

Like having thousands of tickets at 30 USD ?

The whining about ticket prices can begin when they charge what Stone$, Madonna, or Macca charge.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Tumbling Dice on October 13, 2012, 02:36:05 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
How can anyone say that the "pop" period hasn't given them some of their best songs baffles me. "Please" is one of the finest songs they've ever done. They blame "Pop" for the fact they went into stadiums in the middle of a recession for the second time in less than six months, and wonder why they didn't sell any tickets when plenty of people couldn't afford food.

That didn't stop them flogging oodles of tickets at extortionate prices during a decession on the last tour.

Like having thousands of tickets at 30 USD ?


And they had many more tickets at higher prices.  Some of which are extortionate for a stadium show.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Thunder Peel on October 29, 2012, 06:44:08 PM
Pop is the only U2 album that I have yet to hear a full song performed from in concert. It's one of my favorites and I agree that songs like Gone, SATS, Mofo, Discotheque, Please, and LNOE would fit in with just about any show. If they were able to play Scarlet and Zooropa on the 360 Tour then I have high hopes something from Pop will resurface again.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Johnny Feathers on October 29, 2012, 07:26:08 PM
Thing is, there seem to be some "default" Pop songs they rely on.  SATS is a go-to acoustic piece.  WUDM is snippeted.  The other two used to any degree after the PopMart tour are Discotheque (during Vertigo) and Gone (during Elevation).  Gone would be great, yes--the other three aren't as impressive to me.  But if they pulled out Please or Mofo, I'd be floored.

Of course, like the resurrected Zoo Station on Vertigo, I'd also be fearful that any new version would fail to live up to the original.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Tumbling Dice on October 30, 2012, 10:32:34 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Thing is, there seem to be some "default" Pop songs they rely on.  SATS is a go-to acoustic piece.  WUDM is snippeted.

It laziness.

Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: Johnny Feathers on October 30, 2012, 05:10:19 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Thing is, there seem to be some "default" Pop songs they rely on.  SATS is a go-to acoustic piece.  WUDM is snippeted.

It laziness.



Pretty much.
Title: Re: Why has nothing from Pop been played since Elevation Tour?
Post by: The Unknown Caller on November 19, 2012, 07:29:05 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Thing is, there seem to be some "default" Pop songs they rely on.  SATS is a go-to acoustic piece.  WUDM is snippeted.

Both of those were just Elevation though, right? And on that tour they also did Please (Mostly acoustic but once electric), plus Gone as you note and Discotheque semi-regularly.  So it can't really be 'lazy' that they played them since they were playing a few other full band 'Pop' songs at the same time.

They haven't really done anything since Elevation, as was originally said, except the theque twice on Vertigo and worked into Crazy on 360, although they did rehearse Mofo for Vertigo.