U2start.com | Best Live Band Ever

Originally posted by gavinfriday:U2 cannot, but that isn't an issue since their songs are individual masterpieces

They could if they wanted but for whatever reason, they don't - they've got enough material to draw from, but yeah a lengthy set doesn't mean a good show per se, an 80-90 minute gig doesn't have that many songs but if the band puts their heart and soul into the performance and the crowd feed off it etc., you've got a legendary gig in the making.

gavinfriday

16 years

Originally posted by davyjones:[..]

U2 just doesn't want to make a giant light show for each song. Pearl Jam can do what they want on stage. With U2, every second is on paper.
do you get it?

sorry for my english

Probably you haven't visited a Joshua Tree or Unforgettable Fire concert, but U2 didn't have any lightshow for each song back then, still the setlists are almost equal each night.
I don't say that that means the U2 shows are of lower quality than other band's, but I think U2 are not crafted enought to play whatever song they want to during a concert, while Pearl Jam and Springsteen can. And that is a quality.

WojBhoy

16 years

Originally posted by gavinfriday:Probably you haven't visited a Joshua Tree or Unforgettable Fire concert, but U2 didn't have any lightshow for each song back then, still the setlists are almost equal each night.
I don't say that that means the U2 shows are of lower quality than other band's, but I think U2 are not crafted enought to play whatever song they want to during a concert, while Pearl Jam and Springsteen can. And that is a quality.

Oh I know what you meant fella, I wasn't disregarding or misinterpreting it at all

and no, being 19 I didn't get to live the JT/TUF era

And yeah, I don't think U2 are the kind who could spontaneously play whatever song from their back catalogue, but I think with extensive preparation they could muster changed setlists for most shows (and I mean noticeably different, not rotating a couple of songs here'n'there

gavinfriday

16 years

Originally posted by WojBhoy:[..]
Oh I know what you meant fella, I wasn't disregarding or misinterpreting it at all and no, being 19 I didn't get to live the JT/TUF era

And yeah, I don't think U2 are the kind who could spontaneously play whatever song from their back catalogue, but I think with extensive preparation they could muster changed setlists for most shows (and I mean noticeably different, not rotating a couple of songs here'n'there

They really should do that, glad I'm not the only one with that opinion

aussiemofo

16 years

Originally posted by WojBhoy:[..]
Oh I know what you meant fella, I wasn't disregarding or misinterpreting it at all and no, being 19 I didn't get to live the JT/TUF era

And yeah, I don't think U2 are the kind who could spontaneously play whatever song from their back catalogue, but I think with extensive preparation they could muster changed setlists for most shows (and I mean noticeably different, not rotating a couple of songs here'n'there

Let's face it.

Big Production = Great Spectacle

+ Programmed Performance

Not So Big Production ala War through Lovetown = More Spontaneous and Raw Performances

+ Nothing Exciting to Look At

There will always be pros and cons. U2 I don't think will ever go back to the era where they didn't have funky props or stages. I guess we got DVDs such as Blood Red Sky to witness that again.

swallat

16 years