GEN
Active topics
  1. If Bono was not just making up stuff and they really had 3 albums worth of material, then they probably have around 60 total songs to choose from including the aborted Rick Rubin stuff, and other various leftovers from 2000-2009. They have probably written at least another 10-15, so out of as many as 65-75 songs, they probably really like 5 of them, since they are really wanting a Top 40 hit single. They easily could have released an album with songs like North Star and Every Breaking Wave...which was really not a likely single like Bono really believed it to be.

    They probably will write another 20 or so songs, and somebody hanging around will tell them the stuff is the best they have ever done, and they will take the best of that selection and make an album of 12-15 songs.

    I would simply hope they write and record from January 2013 until September 2013, and take the best 12-17 songs running a total time from 60 to 75 minutes, and make that the album. And as a gift to the die hards, make a Super Deluxe Version with another 3 cds of Demos and Outtakes of the album covering everything not saved for the next album after this. Maybe make it 4 Cds and 1 DVD with some videos not on the previous DVDs, and sell it for $50....4cd and 1dvd for that would not be too bad...given Cash Mcguinness' track record.

    As if this post wasn't long enough, I would hope they try a new approach to touring to keep them fresh and not have to deal with as much travel. If the Album is released in Oct 2013, Have them start the tour that month and play one huge stadium show in each city, and then 2 arena shows in the same city...kind of like a mini-residency. The stadium shows could be Greatest Hits with most of the warhorses with a few new songs, and the 2 arena shows could be half hits and half a mix of new songs and hardcore favorites. Maybe play the 22 or so songs a night , but mix it up so out of the 66 songs they play a week, at least 50 of them are different...

    A quick USA example:

    Oct 5: Chicago, Soldier Field
    Oct 7: Chicago, United Center
    Oct 9: Chicago, United Center

    Oct 12: Nashville, LP Field
    Oct 15: Nashville, Bridgestone Arena
    Oct 17: Nashville, Bridgestone Arena

    Oct 19: Atlanta, Georgia Dome
    Oct 21: Atlanta, Phillips Arena
    Oct 26: Atlanta, Phillips Arena

    Nov 2: Tampa, Raymond James Stadium
    Nov 4: Tampa, St. Pete Times Forum
    Nov 7: Tampa, St. Pete Times Forum

    Now what would all this accomplish? First, having nearly everything they record on the deluxe edition would please most or at least many diehards not fully content with waiting 4.5 years for a new album. Having 3 mostly different shows to attend would give both the Casual fan and the Obsessed close to what they want. Also, the above example is 12 shows in 38 days in 4 cities, which would give them time to rest, and Bono would hopefully get to rest his voice.
    Could they master 50 or so songs? Maybe, maybe not. By having all the time off, they could spend extra time in rehearsal with Bono perhaps lip synching most of them to save his voice. He could practice Spanish Eyes 50 days and a row, and still screw it up. They played a bunch of songs on 360, and other than a few rough takes here and there, most everything sounded at least pretty decent.
  2. ^ the above touring plan seems to nice and unrealistic at the same time There's no way they would do a stadium+arenas in the same city, the same week. No way. It's just too good to be true. I liked the Spanish Eyes gag though
  3. one city per week? jeez with their recent touring pace the tour would last really till the end of the world
    and all the cities doubled in stadium .. quite hard for the McGuinnes claimed sold-out ..

    nevertheless a very nice dream
  4. The proposed tour plan looks like a logistical and financial nightmare.

    First you have to book a stadium and an arena in the same city during the same week for the same group. That would mean twice the set-up/tear-down crews, twice the transport vehicles, etc. in the city during that given week. You'd have to somehow find a city with scheduling that actually works like that (which is going to be pretty rare in the US because of the different sporting events going on).

    Besides, I would honestly rather them not be playing an arena show and a stadium show in the same city in the same week. Do an arena show first, then make a second pass for a stadium gig.
  5. Originally posted by ahn1991:The proposed tour plan looks like a logistical and financial nightmare.

    First you have to book a stadium and an arena in the same city during the same week for the same group. That would mean twice the set-up/tear-down crews, twice the transport vehicles, etc. in the city during that given week. You'd have to somehow find a city with scheduling that actually works like that (which is going to be pretty rare in the US because of the different sporting events going on).

    Besides, I would honestly rather them not be playing an arena show and a stadium show in the same city in the same week. Do an arena show first, then make a second pass for a stadium gig.

    The Stones did it really easy and made a huge profit, but not quite on the scale I imagined for U2. It is actually quite easy. The one thing I left out of my post is that the Arena shows would be advertised as "Bare Bones" as humanly possible. Past Tours always tried to top the previous ones or top The Stones or some other spectacle in entertainment....This tour would make light of that and go the opposite direction... That means the cheapest possible expenses for the arena shows, and the stadium shows would no longer try to top the Zoo TV world, the Popmart Thingy or any other show. They could spend much less on everything, have cheaper tickets and focus only on the music. A hit single couldn't hurt, but my pipe dream of a tour is more likely than U2 being played on Pop radio, or any artist over 35 on Pop radio these days...

    Yeah, a pipe dream, but it could be done.
  6. Relase album in October(ish) then do either European arenas. Do US arenas in New Year, take a break and that leaves April-September for Stadiums if they want to ramp it up. Aus/SA over Christmas and New Year again.
  7. in that scenario i think the album would come out a bit later (closer to christmas, november) and the arena legs would have US first .. promotional purposes .. aside of some little appearances in Europe before maybe
  8. behind the lines i believe it will be quite hard a whole European arena leg and almost impossible in Italy .. very very unluckily
  9. Bono is a showman first and foremost. I don't care what they are saying now, when it comes down to it, Bono will want there to be a big show regardless of what venue they play in. When I hear "bare bones" in the context of U2, I immediately think of the Elevation Tour. There is no way U2 will tour with anything less than that.

    Also, in what world does "arena tour" translate to cheaper tickets? Usually it's the exact opposite. Squaring The Circle talks about that exact issue. The main reason they wanted 360 to hit stadiums is because with the increased capacity, they could have cheaper price brackets and, in a ways, combat the secondary market for tickets. If anything, an arena tour would increase the prices significantly.
  10. Originally posted by ahn1991:Bono is a showman first and foremost. I don't care what they are saying now, when it comes down to it, Bono will want there to be a big show regardless of what venue they play in. When I hear "bare bones" in the context of U2, I immediately think of the Elevation Tour. There is no way U2 will tour with anything less than that.

    Also, in what world does "arena tour" translate to cheaper tickets? Usually it's the exact opposite. Squaring The Circle talks about that exact issue. The main reason they wanted 360 to hit stadiums is because with the increased capacity, they could have cheaper price brackets and, in a ways, combat the secondary market for tickets. If anything, an arena tour would increase the prices significantly.

    The showman in Bono would kill my idea, but I don't want an arena tour. I want both, which is logistically possible if they kept it cheap with a simple stage, no ridiculous lights, and a modest screen for those in the cheap seats. Prince plays huge venues in Europe and arenas on the same tour, and he is the cheapest in the business.

    With one stadium show and 2 arena shows, they would clean up on the stadium shows and make a modest profit on the arena ones. In the meantime, they could please the hardcore fanbase and the casual one. Of course to make my pipe dream even more complete: The DVD would have two versions of the same show:
    1 with the shakey camera angles that change every 2 seconds, and 1 with 1970's style panning where you can actually focus.

    Now that is a pipe dream.
  11. Originally posted by ahn1991:Bono is a showman first and foremost. I don't care what they are saying now, when it comes down to it, Bono will want there to be a big show regardless of what venue they play in. When I hear "bare bones" in the context of U2, I immediately think of the Elevation Tour. There is no way U2 will tour with anything less than that.

    Also, in what world does "arena tour" translate to cheaper tickets? Usually it's the exact opposite. Squaring The Circle talks about that exact issue. The main reason they wanted 360 to hit stadiums is because with the increased capacity, they could have cheaper price brackets and, in a ways, combat the secondary market for tickets. If anything, an arena tour would increase the prices significantly.

    I don't really understand this logic at all. The bigger crews, bigger setup, longer stadium reservations and overall bigger concert to me would require bigger ticket sales. While those prices would be dispersed among a greater crowd, I don't see how a scaled down tour with a scaled down audience would warrant an increase in ticket prices. Either it would be around the same or cheaper, at least it SHOULD be. If i have to pay more to see U2 in a small arena with a small stage than I did to see them on 360 I'll be pretty pissed.
  12. Originally posted by RattleandHum1988:[..]

    I don't really understand this logic at all. The bigger crews, bigger setup, longer stadium reservations and overall bigger concert to me would require bigger ticket sales. While those prices would be dispersed among a greater crowd, I don't see how a scaled down tour with a scaled down audience would warrant an increase in ticket prices. Either it would be around the same or cheaper, at least it SHOULD be. If i have to pay more to see U2 in a small arena with a small stage than I did to see them on 360 I'll be pretty pissed.

    The logic is pretty simple: supply and demand. There'd be a lesser amount of tickets, but probably still about the same amount of people wanting to buy them as when they do stadiums. Scalpers would get even worse too.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.