TJT
Active topics
Joshua Tree Tour 2019
 Legs (1): New Zealand, Australia and Asia
Shows: 15
  1. Originally posted by colbourne25:[..]
    Fingers crossed.

    SURELY, given the nature of this tour, it being shorter in length and in places they very rarely play (and some never) they will extend the sets a few songs.

    To me, this tour will be the ultimate indicator as to whether the band is in autopilot or whether they actually want to put in some work. If they play the exact same setlist (or change only 1 song) as the JT17 tour it will be clear they're being (very) lazy and in autopilot mode playing the songs they've played a million times over and what they would consider easy to play. I am really really hoping that they branch out but I'm not holding my breath
    I actually don't think playing the same songs would be an indication of laziness, rather since this tour is basically being classified as a continuation of JT17 tour I expect most of the songs should be the same. Also given that the whole JT30 tour has basically been marketed as a bit of a JT + 'greatest hits' tour I would be surprised if they change their strategy for this leg of the tour.

    I'm probably in the minority here but I actually want them to play JT + hits like they did for JT17. As an Australian who hasn't seen them live before I want my first U2 shows to be full of hits. Plus I think in a crowd of 40,000-60,000 I think hits will go down much better to the more casual audience than playing a lot less well known songs or deep cuts.

    In my opinion I think mega fans of all bands/artists (like us) are too quick to place our expectations, judgement and labels on the band according to how we want to see them act and what we want them to play. Calling the band lazy is unfair if they only play their big hits on this tour because we don't know why they choose to do so. It might be because they are more comfortable playing those songs, or it might be because they think those songs will work best with the crowd. Remember they are playing stadiums in a market where they haven't been since 360 and other places they haven't been. These places are more likely to want to hear the greatest hits played rather than deeper cuts. Also (another point against the band being lazy) remember that I+E and E+I tour were full deep cuts and other songs the band would be less comfortable playing. If the band were really lazy they wouldn't be doing this tour (they are rich enough that they don't have to), they wouldn't bother trying to make new albums/phone them in as much as possible (probably playing to nostalgia) and every new tour would basically be a greatest hits tour that aims to make as much money as possible as easily as possible. As we can probably all agree this what U2 has been doing.
  2. Originally posted by JRoz:[..]
    I actually don't think playing the same songs would be an indication of laziness, rather since this tour is basically being classified as a continuation of JT17 tour I expect most of the songs should be the same. Also given that the whole JT30 tour has basically been marketed as a bit of a JT + 'greatest hits' tour I would be surprised if they change their strategy for this leg of the tour.

    I'm probably in the minority here but I actually want them to play JT + hits like they did for JT17. As an Australian who hasn't seen them live before I want my first U2 shows to be full of hits. Plus I think in a crowd of 40,000-60,000 I think hits will go down much better to the more casual audience than playing a lot less well known songs or deep cuts.

    In my opinion I think mega fans of all bands/artists (like us) are too quick to place our expectations, judgement and labels on the band according to how we want to see them act and what we want them to play. Calling the band lazy is unfair if they only play their big hits on this tour because we don't know why they choose to do so. It might be because they are more comfortable playing those songs, or it might be because they think those songs will work best with the crowd. Remember they are playing stadiums in a market where they haven't been since 360 and other places they haven't been. These places are more likely to want to hear the greatest hits played rather than deeper cuts. Also (another point against the band being lazy) remember that I+E and E+I tour were full deep cuts and other songs the band would be less comfortable playing. If the band were really lazy they wouldn't be doing this tour (they are rich enough that they don't have to), they wouldn't bother trying to make new albums/phone them in as much as possible (probably playing to nostalgia) and every new tour would basically be a greatest hits tour that aims to make as much money as possible as easily as possible. As we can probably all agree this what U2 has been doing.
    You can still be lazy and get forced into a tour through your contracts
  3. As a very casual fan of Springsteen who saw him for the first time a couple of years back, I would say it's good to throw in a few deeper cuts. I obviously knew his hits but it was his performance and unfamiliar songs that made me dive deeper into his catalogue. U2 has that same opportunity to ignite a deeper curiosity than interest in the hits.
  4. Originally posted by Sydney_MIke:As a very casual fan of Springsteen who saw him for the first time a couple of years back, I would say it's good to throw in a few deeper cuts. I obviously knew his hits but it was his performance and unfamiliar songs that made me dive deeper into his catalogue. U2 has that same opportunity to ignite a deeper curiosity than interest in the hits.
    Great point. I mean, they've just reissued Pop on beautiful orange vinyl. Play even one song from Pop to get people interested in listening to the album again. Could only improve sales one would think...
  5. Originally posted by colbourne25:[..]
    Great point. I mean, they've just reissued Pop on beautiful orange vinyl. Play even one song from Pop to get people interested in listening to the album again. Could only improve sales one would think...
    Man they have sooo many unbelievably great tunes from POP, I mean ridiculously stunning songs, it’s a freaking masterpiece, I can’t believe they don’t support this album live! It’s time for the band to realize that and go nuts
  6. Originally posted by Sydney_MIke:As a very casual fan of Springsteen who saw him for the first time a couple of years back, I would say it's good to throw in a few deeper cuts. I obviously knew his hits but it was his performance and unfamiliar songs that made me dive deeper into his catalogue. U2 has that same opportunity to ignite a deeper curiosity than interest in the hits.
    But Bruce does play for hours and hours and hours... he has the time to play deep cuts and sign requests.
  7. Originally posted by iamcrazytonight:[..]
    Man they have sooo many unbelievably great tunes from POP, I mean ridiculously stunning songs, it’s a freaking masterpiece, I can’t believe they don’t support this album live! It’s time for the band to realize that and go nuts
    I very much agree that Pop is a great album. I've been defending it since it came out in the 90s. Recently, I've been reading Niall Stoles: The Stories Behind Every U2 Song and have just finished the Pop Section. I have a feeling that he really likes the Pop songs. His writing voice, in my opinion, just gives off a vibe of really being into these songs. I haven't read past this section yet, so we'll see how the more recent songs are described. I just really like his enthusiasm.

    Now on topic for this thread, I would welcome them surprising us with a Pop song on this tour. One would be fine, I don't want to be greedy or demanding, but maybe something other than Staring At The Sun...
  9. Originally posted by Sydney_MIke:As a very casual fan of Springsteen who saw him for the first time a couple of years back, I would say it's good to throw in a few deeper cuts. I obviously knew his hits but it was his performance and unfamiliar songs that made me dive deeper into his catalogue. U2 has that same opportunity to ignite a deeper curiosity than interest in the hits.
    I would argue that a few songs from JT are deep cuts, especially to a causal audience. Remember that RHMT hadn't been played live until JT17 and most of side B only really appeared sporadically outside of the original JT tour/Lovetown tour and JT17. Sure they aren't nearly as much of a deep cut as basically anything from Pop or other less loved U2 albums but they aren't that well known by casual U2 fans.
  10. Originally posted by Sydney_MIke:As a very casual fan of Springsteen who saw him for the first time a couple of years back, I would say it's good to throw in a few deeper cuts. I obviously knew his hits but it was his performance and unfamiliar songs that made me dive deeper into his catalogue. U2 has that same opportunity to ignite a deeper curiosity than interest in the hits.
    Same here, went into the show only knowing the hits. The highlight for me was “Incident in 57th street”, it blew me away and I had never heard it! That caused me to do a deep dive, and it was a very rewarding experience. Same thing happened in 2003 when my girlfriend at the time drug me to an REM show.
  11. Originally posted by JRoz:[..]
    I would argue that a few songs from JT are deep cuts, especially to a causal audience. Remember that RHMT hadn't been played live until JT17 and most of side B only really appeared sporadically outside of the original JT tour/Lovetown tour and JT17. Sure they aren't nearly as much of a deep cut as basically anything from Pop or other less loved U2 albums but they aren't that well known by casual U2 fans.
    I think that side 2 of the Joshua Tree eats up all the allowed space for deep cuts in the setlist. The rest pretty much HAS to be hits. That’s my big problem with the JT Tour model.
  12. Originally posted by podiumboy:[..]
    Same here, went into the show only knowing the hits. The highlight for me was “Incident in 57th street”, it blew me away and I had never heard it! That caused me to do a deep dive, and it was a very rewarding experience. Same thing happened in 2003 when my girlfriend at the time drug me to an REM show.
    REM has some very cool stuff from the IRS days.