FEA
Active topics
  1. Originally posted by opsopcopolis:[..]


    What a bizarre complaint. If he’s so meticulous, took the time to demo, and thought it sounded good enough, who are we to say it’s not his real sound? What if this is what he does moving forward? He’ll never sound like the edge again?
    Not quite that bizarre. Just try listening to the guitar sound/tone of Streets compared to even something as recent as the ei Tour or JT Tour 2019.
  2. Originally posted by Keeb13r:[..]
    Exactly. Edge also alternated between using the emulation pedals and his regular amp setup. So unless someone is an audio industry professional, I have to call bullshit on any of these types of complaints.

    Also... [..]


    Could this be more uninformed? So anyone who works in digital art or CGI is in the gaming industry? And even if they did work in gaming, is that supposed to be a slight against them?
    Not a slight against the CGI guys. The effect of Atomic City is superb. More of a slight against U2 because they have been technological innovators but this time instead of taking advantage of the Sphere screen (like Postcards From The Edge did), they just did something less personal (i.e. a CGI image versus Anton Corbijn film) and just added skies. So other tours pushed technology, but this residency did not even maximize the technology they had at their disposal. Their final song is just a collage of few animal images repeated many times to "fill" the sphere - there was even no animation or movement. That's on U2 (or 75% U2 as some would say), their choices, and their values - not at all on the CGI team.

    Cheers,

    J
  3. Get back under your bridge Jick
  4. Did you go?

    Originally posted by jick:The show itself could not measure up to the last 3 tours - JT Tour and ei Tour. The former had 8k videos shot by Anton Corbijn himself, while the ei Tour had some nice moving images. Meanwhile, the Sphere was just a "budget" version of the last 3 tours with just an added sky, roof, or ceiling. It did not feature real videos but just graphics created by people in the computer gaming industry. The supposed "finale" was just a collage of animals that was not even moving, and was copy/pasted and repeated many times just to fill up the Sphere screen. The Fly was a rehash of the ei Tour graphics. So what if Streets or Atomic City had a sky above? Guess what, the same thing can be said for stadium shows in the JT Tour but they actually had the real sky above instead of a make-believe one.

    Bono was zapped of all his political commentary and religious references. Perhaps it was by design to appease those who ridicule him for talking too much in previous tours. But agree or disagree with his words, they are what charges him up to do a great show. Robbed of his ability to rant, preach, and pray, Bono is uninspired and like a headless chicken.

    The Edge is the scientist and perfectionist of the band. He is so meticulous with his amps and the signal that he used different wires, microphones, speakers, amps, and for every song. Now, he doesn't use his old rigs and Dallas isn't as prominent here because Edge is using an "amp emulator" which is something that just mimics what he used to do before through trial and error. The guitar is not authentic Edge but more of a "sounds like" Edge.

    Clayton seems to be in another planet whenever he is not focused on communicating with Van Den Berg to guide him through the songs. If he is not making contact with Van Den Berg, he seems like he is somewhere else worried about his mustache or his next fashion statement. Is he really present with us?

    Van Den Berg is pure energy. I cannot say enough superlatives to commend his effort on carrying on the legacy of Mullen's music. He is doing his best. He seems to be the most professional and hard working member of the band. But that's the problem: he is not a member of the band but a substitute. When your substitute outworks you, then you know it is a tour to forget.

    So yes, I voted that this is a tour to forget. It sounds like an uninspired U2 cover band, doing cabaret karaoke, with some nice graphics and manufactured sky above for better effects.

    Let's forget all this and move on to the next album and tour.

    Cheers,

    J


  5. You know the answer to that.

    I rank the 2018 IE tour pretty low in my book. Didn't like the album, felt most of the tour was an inferior rehash of a much better 2015 tour, etc. Saw only two shows that tour, and I stand by my opinion. Some folks loved that tour.

    Everybody is entitled to their opinion. Even if their opinion is not exactly well informed (by seeing the show), strict originalist (no Larry = no U2), or just flat out bizzare (graphics are budget and lame! Edge digital guitar is a phony!). I think we can just weigh certain opinions a little differently when reading these posts...I know I do.
  6. Originally posted by hoserama:[..]


    You know the answer to that.

    I rank the 2018 IE tour pretty low in my book. Didn't like the album, felt most of the tour was an inferior rehash of a much better 2015 tour, etc. Saw only two shows that tour, and I stand by my opinion. Some folks loved that tour.

    Everybody is entitled to their opinion. Even if their opinion is not exactly well informed (by seeing the show), strict originalist (no Larry = no U2), or just flat out bizzare (graphics are budget and lame! Edge digital guitar is a phony!). I think we can just weigh certain opinions a little differently when reading these posts...I know I do.
    Get out of here with your sound reasoning and rationale! Madness I say.

    But as a non attendee (seeing as that now needs added as a condition of having an opinion), watching your multicam I was struck by how substantially under utilised the screens were. Whole sections of not a lot really. This dispenses with the reality that I cannot fathom the physical depth that the screens will have offered in person having not stood in the room but it feels like the band maybe only got 40-50% of a production together before opening.

    Limited rehearsal time, construction delays, software delays of just downright not having a clue what to dream up could all be a factor but I do suspect that following acts are going to blow U2 out of the water in terms of production. First isn’t always best.
  7. Originally posted by germcevoy:[..]
    Get out of here with your sound reasoning and rationale! Madness I say.

    But as a non attendee (seeing as that now needs added as a condition of having an opinion), watching your multicam I was struck by how substantially under utilised the screens were. Whole sections of not a lot really. This dispenses with the reality that I cannot fathom the physical depth that the screens will have offered in person having not stood in the room but it feels like the band maybe only got 40-50% of a production together before opening.

    Limited rehearsal time, construction delays, software delays of just downright not having a clue what to dream up could all be a factor but I do suspect that following acts are going to blow U2 out of the water in terms of production. First isn’t always best.
    Good point. I do think U2 established the show as a proof of concept, and future acts will have watched the U2 at the Sphere and looked at what worked and what didn't.

    I thought the show needed more "cool" screen moments, like the forced perspective box in the Fly, or entering the "ark" in With Or Without You.
  8. Originally posted by germcevoy:[..]
    Get out of here with your sound reasoning and rationale! Madness I say.

    But as a non attendee (seeing as that now needs added as a condition of having an opinion), watching your multicam I was struck by how substantially under utilised the screens were. Whole sections of not a lot really. This dispenses with the reality that I cannot fathom the physical depth that the screens will have offered in person having not stood in the room but it feels like the band maybe only got 40-50% of a production together before opening.

    Limited rehearsal time, construction delays, software delays of just downright not having a clue what to dream up could all be a factor but I do suspect that following acts are going to blow U2 out of the water in terms of production. First isn’t always best.
    The first 8 songs have full on video production, tipping the nod to zoo tv along the way.
    The middle set was designed to strip out the intensity and it did
    The ‘wake up the baby’ set built a steady uphill climb from acrobat on the turntable visual right back out to full production.
    From the reveal at the end of Elevation it’s a staged romp through vegas and the desert to the Arc.
    It was designed specifically to do that.
    The production team worked on it for a straight 12 months and the rehearsal time was not restricted.
    Assumptions and reality don’t seem to align.
  9. When you are there in person the screens can get overpowering. I think it was a conscious decision to switch them off for big chunks of the show to avoid overload . It was a good decision.
  10. The band and the creative team intentionally decided not to fill up the screen 100% of the time to avoid overwhelming the audience and so the band could be the focal point when it was used less. If tight deadlines had been a factor, you would have seen increased usage of the screen as the residency went on and more content could be developed.
  11. Originally posted by Keeb13r:The band and the creative team intentionally decided not to fill up the screen 100% of the time to avoid overwhelming the audience and so the band could be the focal point when it was used less. If tight deadlines had been a factor, you would have seen increased usage of the screen as the residency went on and more content could be developed.
    Instead we just get a door prop with a doorbell.
  12. The balloon thing suggests the production team didn’t quite have all the time they wanted (or needed). But all valid points stated above.