1. Originally posted by KaiserJose:[..]

    Em hang on.

    Starting from the 90's we've had DVD's from Australia, Mexico, Ireland, Milan (sort of), South America and two from the States. It just so happens that the two worst audiences were in the US.

    While I won't generalise completely this shouldn't be totally ignored either.


    They should have recorded the shows from MSG after 09.11.01.10.24,25,27.01.The band,not us,the band have stated those 3 shows were their best.The shows at the Garden in Oct 2005 were great.They played 5 nights in the week of 10.07.05.They also played 2 more times at MSG in Nov 2005 and also 1 night in May 2005.Thats 8 nights in NYC.The crowds here in NYC are great.That is the reason the band love to play here in NYCI. saw Pearl Jam in Barcelona 05.25.00,that was the loudest crowd IMO.They sang and yelled and moved the WHOLE time.
  2. Originally posted by EDDMB:[..]

    They should have recorded the shows from MSG after 09.11.01.10.24,25,27.01.The band,not us,the band have stated those 3 shows were their best.The shows at the Garden in Oct 2005 were great.They played 5 nights in the week of 10.07.05.They also played 2 more times at MSG in Nov 2005 and also 1 night in May 2005.Thats 8 nights in NYC.The crowds here in NYC are great.That is the reason the band love to play here in NYCI. saw Pearl Jam in Barcelona 05.25.00,that was the loudest crowd IMO.They sang and yelled and moved the WHOLE time.


    I think mentioning it once is enough. By the by, they've been quoted as saying they were exceptionally emotional nights, some of their most treasured. Not that they were their best.

    You're obviously proud of NYC and the fans there. No problem. After all, there is ultimately no right or wrong answer to this question.
  3. Originally posted by djrlewis:[..]

    Exceptional circumstances that we all hope to God will never be repeated.


    MSG is the one place in America I would like to see U2 perform.


    Yes.I dont know how it is possible that the band continue to have great gigs at MSG,but dont release the shows.They have dropped the ball the last 2 tours.Boston and Chicago are great,but as you said,MSG is amazing.I did see U2 a few times in Boston.One of the greatest I saw in Boston was,03.17.92.Pattys Day in Boston.Great night indeed.
  4. New York City is definitely the place to see U2 if you ever come stateside...although i also had a really great experience in Toronto. Would have loved a dvd from those concerts in 2001. The emotional value of seeing those nights on film i imagine would be breath taking
  5. Originally posted by Doc32:New York City is definitely the place to see U2 if you ever come stateside...although i also had a really great experience in Toronto. Would have loved a dvd from those concerts in 2001. The emotional value of seeing those nights on film i imagine would be breath taking


    Yes.You are right Doc.But U2 have played there many,many times.I saw them the first time they played MSG.04.01.85.It was fantastic.Both nights at Yankee Stadium August 1992 as well.NYC has a very boisterous audience almost always.Depends on the band.We resemble an animal like exuberance.LOL
  6. Originally posted by djrlewis:[..]

    I think mentioning it once is enough. By the by, they've been quoted as saying they were exceptionally emotional nights, some of their most treasured. Not that they were their best.

    You're obviously proud of NYC and the fans there. No problem. After all, there is ultimately no right or wrong answer to this question.


    I mentioned it again because I was responding to some else.We can also argue that Mexico 97,very good show indeed,was not half the show Sarajevo was.So a DVD release doesnt mean it was THE show of the tour.
  7. From what I experienced in the pit on chicago 2, I thought it was definitely a high energy crowd.


  8. U2 have always loved playing in Chicago.The Joshua Tree show from Rosemont in April 1987,the Elevation shows from May 2001,and May 2005.Very solid shows that I have listened to many times over.


  9. if I make future plans to see U2 in the US it will be in Chicago
  10. I would have to agree with you. I know the band connects with each crowd in a different way, but its so uplifting to hear Bono over the mike mark out specific Chicago landmarks before singing Magnificent or hearing a cover of the popular local band Wilco. That really brings out the best in a crowd. I'm sure there have been better crowds, but it was surely an experience of a lifetime that I couldn't have asked for anything better).



    (ps finally working on my Chicago review- )
  11. Originally posted by EDDMB:[..]

    I mentioned it again because I was responding to some else.We can also argue that Mexico 97,very good show indeed,was not half the show Sarajevo was.So a DVD release doesnt mean it was THE show of the tour.



    I realise that but you're missing the point. No one has made the argument that the dvd's are recounting the best gig of the tour so what you've said seems kind of bizarre.

    The dvds have portrayed the states as an inactive, watch-as-you-go crowd compared to the rest of the world. That's not to say that they're all like that (how would I know) but the general impression has left me fairly prosaic.
  12. Originally posted by KaiserJose:[..]

    I realise that but you're missing the point. No one has made the argument that the dvd's are recounting the best gig of the tour so what you've said seems kind of bizarre.

    The dvds have portrayed the states as an inactive, watch-as-you-go crowd compared to the rest of the world. That's not to say that they're all like that (how would I know) but the general impression has left me fairly prosaic.


    Bizzare?????..Dont you think they would at least TRY to film a great show from the tour???????.Hamilsh said they filmed the wrong show.They should film a couple of shows,as they did in 2001.Sane was 3 times the crowd of Boston.I guess not..because you have never seen a show here.As I said,I have seen many concerts in Europe.Im not missing the point.You are.