1. They should close with a rocker (The Miracle) as Bono always says 'at the end of experience you find innocence' thus why not close with the opening track of I+E? (In the line of REM's last album which closes full circle with the riff of Discoverer)
  2. Originally posted by TheEdge10:I’ve listened to both and the new set is way better. If they had kept the Innocence section as it was it would’ve been fine, but so much of it had been stripped away that it no longer packed the same punch. In 2015 it went IWF-Iris-Cedarwood-SFS-SBS-RBW. By the end of 2018 it went Ocean (without vocals)-Iris (abbreviated)-Cedarwood-SBS (dreadful transition into)-UTEOTW.

    The other thing that killed it was Bono’s talking between songs. He would fully introduce each song, leaving gaps between, whereas in 2015 he would either introduce the songs as the music started or just begin singing right away. It was a lot more seamless. The new section doesn’t have as strong of a narrative (although Bono seems to suggest that there still is a narrative present in that run), but on a performance level it works so much better.


    You described it well, you describe it well, they ruin the Innocence section. Bono talks to much and the encore needs some "fire".
  3. Originally posted by RememberEveryMoment:They should close with a rocker (The Miracle) as Bono always says 'at the end of experience you find innocence' thus why not close with the opening track of I+E? (In the line of REM's last album which closes full circle with the riff of Discoverer)
    The outro music is The Miracle of Joey Ramone.
  4. It varies.
  5. Originally posted by RememberEveryMoment:They should close with a rocker (The Miracle) as Bono always says 'at the end of experience you find innocence' thus why not close with the opening track of I+E? (In the line of REM's last album which closes full circle with the riff of Discoverer)
    Thematically, 13 is the perfect closer. Yeah I'd love if they ended with a rocker like Streets etc, but 13 is perfect. The Miracle is about the band setting off on their journey, to me it would be completely out of place.
  6. I wonder how many of you raving about the addition on AB songs missed the 2nd half of 2011 or never saw the ZOO TV tour...

    ?

    It's lazy U2.
  7. Okay, so I am back from seeing both shows in London and will admit to not being disappointed in the performances. As I said in my first post, AB is my favourite album and getting to hear tracks like Horses and Acrobat was a dream come true.

    Still would have liked to have heard some SOI but with a catalogue like theirs they could easily do 3 nights with a completely different set-list each time and we'd all complain about missing something.

    The biggest issue right now is the upcoming hiatus until there is new music and another tour. Sigh!
  8. Originally posted by U232323:As far as going to Aus, they should do the show Apollo NY style and forget hauling the big screen if that is the issue. The fans there deserve it.

    Personally, I suspect they would spend more money hauling it to all of the locations around North America and Europe than they would in Australia. Yes, we are a long way away and that adds to the initial cost, but once here they could easily do extended stays in the 5 main cities as they did with the LoveTown Tour.

    I recently saw Pink and she puts on a spectacular theatrical show, with a lot of dancers and singers; so that wouldn't have been cheap but she did 9 nights in Sydney in a 21,000 seat arena, as well as 11 in Melbourne. Given sales for 360 and Vertigo, U2 could easily do a similar number. That's 9 shows where they don't incur transportation costs in between venues. For that many shows in North America or Europe, they'd probably have to transport between 4-6 cities.

    Lots of other artists manage to make their way regularly down here with sophisticated staging, so why not U2?