The U2 Live Audience

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.

Originally posted by EDDMB:[..]

It should be ignored,they filmed 2 shows at the start of the tour.Big mistake by the band.The Milan show from 2005 should have been the DVD,I agree.But we all know the Italians and Spanish are the best live audiences.Thats not news....By the way..I see you have never even seen the band live.How can you argue about seeing the band in Europe instead of the USA when you have never attended a show???

Originally posted by germcevoy:[..]

his point is that watching a DVD filmed in a certain country can give you an impression as to what the crowds are like for that country. You watch Slane and you see a crazy audience (even the guys half a mile up the back), all going wild and bouncing and you think 'wow what a crowd'. Then you watch Chicago and see people in the pit only feet from the band just standing looking about them. I for one cannot watch that Chicago DVD because the lack of anything by the crowd. Whether the crowd were shit or made to look shit is irrelevant. What can be relevant though is somebody watching that DVD may come to the conclusion that Chicago/American crowds are a little lame.

Originally posted by EDDMB:[..]

Wow..again we get into this..You cant judge a show from a DVD.I,not you,bit I HAVE seen bands play in Europe and America.The shows were great.I did see Radiohead at Earls Cout Nov 2003.Was great show.But I also saw them last year here in New York.Was not lame my friend.It seems that SOME of the Europeans just like to...as you would say..slag off on Americans.I dont understand why.And by the way..THE BEST VERSION OF BAD/STREETS IS from the boston SHOW/DVD.

Originally posted by EDDMB:[..]

Wow..again we get into this..You cant judge a show from a DVD.I,not you,bit I HAVE seen bands play in Europe and America.The shows were great.I did see Radiohead at Earls Cout Nov 2003.Was great show.But I also saw them last year here in New York.Was not lame my friend.It seems that SOME of the Europeans just like to...as you would say..slag off on Americans.I dont understand why.And by the way..THE BEST VERSION OF BAD/STREETS IS from the boston SHOW/DVD.

Originally posted by EDDMB:[..]

Didnt you also say if you see the band in the states,you would want it to be in Chicago??

Originally posted by germcevoy:[..]

The reason these DVD's are released is to give you an impression of what the show was like. Why else would they release it? So obviously a show can at least be partly judged by what is viewed on the DVD (lame crowds and all). Nobody is slagging off Americans either/

BAD/STREETS from the Boston DVD is too heavily edited and chopped to call it the best. On the bootleg (from whichever one of the 3 shows) the Bad/Streets transition sounds like any other night on the Elevation tour (apart from All I Want Is You nights).

Did you attend those Boston shows that were filmed for DVD?

Originally posted by germcevoy:[..]

Yep. Been to Chicago twice. Great city and would love to go back. If U2 are playing then thats a bonus

Originally posted by EDDMB:[..]

No I did not,but I saw the band 3 times on Elevation,NYC,NJ and Philly.That version and the one from MSG on 10.24.01 are amazing.I like the Boston version better because it sounds better.Its a release,compared to a good soundboard from MSG on 10.25.01.The released version sounds better as it should.Me and you can debate this.Its fun.But,IMO,if you havent seen a band live,then you really dont know what its like.I saw Oasis London,that show blew away the many times I have seen them here in NYC.So,I do agree with you on some points.

Originally posted by EDDMB:[..]

Iam biased here,I admit that.But I think if you see U2 in America,NYC is the place.We,like Chicago and Boston,have our share of great Irish pubs.LOL

Originally posted by germcevoy:[..]

Boston sounds better because what you see and hear on the DVD has been improved. All nicely chopped and edited to give it that almost flawless transition (which actually didn't happen on the night). And you judged that to be the best Bad/Streets transition from the DVD, just after telling me you cant judge anything from a DVD?

My favorite Streets transition from the Elevation tour is the one from New York on October 24th (a show that ranks in my top ten favorite U2 shows). I didn't attend the gig but I can tell it was better than some of the U2 gigs I attended this year.

Originally posted by EDDMB:[..]

I went to that show,10.24.01.It was amazing.There was not a dry eye in the house.The reason I like Boston beter is,yes,the sound.The performance is not close to the NYC shows versions.If the 3 shows from Oct 2001 at MSG were released,they would be my favorites,for my obvious personal reasons being a New Yorker and the shows were only a month after 09.11.01.And for some reason,I think Im the only person to review that gig on your site.