Bad Sydney Morning Herald U2 Review

[elevated_u2_fan]

I disagree.

First, this author gets to spew forth his opinion to the masses. Isn't a reader then entitled to counter? Does one have to be a "crazy fan" in order to disagree? Does one have to be a "hater" to not enjoy the album?

If NLOTH was another version of ATYCLB, I would agree. It's not. In fact, I feel it's the most adventurous U2 have been in over a decade. I further feel that it has some of U2's best work since the 80's and early 90's.

Additionally, when I listen to music, whether it's the coined sound of the Jonas Brothers, the lullaby rock of Coldplay, the stolen riffs of Beyonce, the mimicry of others by Justin Timberlake, the regurgitation of Eminem, the boredom of Kelly Clarkson, or the countless rock bands that sound just like U2, I am hard-pressed to look at NLOTH and say that U2 have "lost their edge". When that album is viewed with other popular acts today, it leaps out as fresh, not stale. Hence, the author's comments do come across as more of a "hater" rather than a true evaluation of the work.

But perhaps this is just a view of a "crazy fan" who has no right expressing his views of why NLOTH is indeed a sound album. We should definitely agree with all negative reviews, regardless of whether they are sound comments or not, because "who cares".



It is disappointing that "Magnificent" didn't become a hit. I was positive this would be at least a moderate hit for U2. It's catchy, yet soaring. It has the classic U2 sound, but in an updated style (with the drum machines and disco beat). Yet, for some reason, it just didn't catch on.

But then, I want people to take a good look at music sales. Kelly Clarkson sold tons of her first single via downloads. Her album has sold about half of what U2's has and hasn't done well at all worldwide. Flo Rida and Eminem have had monster singles. Flo Rida's album flew down the charts and Eminem, while seeing the strongest first week sales of the year, still sold less worldwide than U2 did in their respective first weeks.

This means one thing: people are buying "throw-away music". They'll spend 99 cents on a song. It's fast and easy. Don't like it in a month? No big deal - it was only 99 cents. They are buying the song more than the artist. It's almost impulse buying.

U2 are an album band. While they have had their share of hits, some of U2's classics never made it to the Top 40 or were even released as singles. Despite NLOTH not producing any real hit songs, NLOTH is the top selling album so far in 2009.

Could U2 have sold more with "Magnificent" as a lead single? Maybe. Sometimes U2's risks work ("Vertigo") and sometimes they don't ("Discotheque"). This could be another situation, like with "Pop", where the lead single negatively influenced the album. It's a shame though as NLOTH is a truly great album. U2 also could have sold more with a holiday release. Holiday sales probably would have NLOTH up at least another million - maybe two million - units worldwide.

Still, even with holiday sales, overall music sales are down. People will buy a song, not the album, not the artist.

I guess if U2 want to stay super-relevant, their next goal is to produce another ultra-catchy sure thing hit that will get 2M downloads on iTunes.

While that's fine, I'd rather have a bluesy, more experimental album like NLOTH.

you make so much sense it's scary...

 

[bigjohn2441]

Just to take this seriously for a moment:

Who the fuck cares? It's their opinion. It's not unfair at all to say the album isn't good. They can say whatever they want. Why should I care? Why should I be offended? So long as what they're saying isn't actually a lie, there's nothing wrong with what they're doing. If I were to e-mail them, they'd call me a crazy U2 fan who's got blinders on.

And you know what? They'd be right, 'cause the only way you're e-mailing a newspaper to tell them a review is unfair is if you're a crazy fan who's got blinders on.

 

[Addicted To Bad]

 

[mama cass]

ah who cares... maybe U2 will fuck the mainstream and go underground

 

[mikal]

I disagree.

First, this author gets to spew forth his opinion to the masses. Isn't a reader then entitled to counter? Does one have to be a "crazy fan" in order to disagree? Does one have to be a "hater" to not enjoy the album?

If NLOTH was another version of ATYCLB, I would agree. It's not. In fact, I feel it's the most adventurous U2 have been in over a decade. I further feel that it has some of U2's best work since the 80's and early 90's.

Additionally, when I listen to music, whether it's the coined sound of the Jonas Brothers, the lullaby rock of Coldplay, the stolen riffs of Beyonce, the mimicry of others by Justin Timberlake, the regurgitation of Eminem, the boredom of Kelly Clarkson, or the countless rock bands that sound just like U2, I am hard-pressed to look at NLOTH and say that U2 have "lost their edge". When that album is viewed with other popular acts today, it leaps out as fresh, not stale. Hence, the author's comments do come across as more of a "hater" rather than a true evaluation of the work.

But perhaps this is just a view of a "crazy fan" who has no right expressing his views of why NLOTH is indeed a sound album. We should definitely agree with all negative reviews, regardless of whether they are sound comments or not, because "who cares".



It is disappointing that "Magnificent" didn't become a hit. I was positive this would be at least a moderate hit for U2. It's catchy, yet soaring. It has the classic U2 sound, but in an updated style (with the drum machines and disco beat). Yet, for some reason, it just didn't catch on.

But then, I want people to take a good look at music sales. Kelly Clarkson sold tons of her first single via downloads. Her album has sold about half of what U2's has and hasn't done well at all worldwide. Flo Rida and Eminem have had monster singles. Flo Rida's album flew down the charts and Eminem, while seeing the strongest first week sales of the year, still sold less worldwide than U2 did in their respective first weeks.

This means one thing: people are buying "throw-away music". They'll spend 99 cents on a song. It's fast and easy. Don't like it in a month? No big deal - it was only 99 cents. They are buying the song more than the artist. It's almost impulse buying.

U2 are an album band. While they have had their share of hits, some of U2's classics never made it to the Top 40 or were even released as singles. Despite NLOTH not producing any real hit songs, NLOTH is the top selling album so far in 2009.

Could U2 have sold more with "Magnificent" as a lead single? Maybe. Sometimes U2's risks work ("Vertigo") and sometimes they don't ("Discotheque"). This could be another situation, like with "Pop", where the lead single negatively influenced the album. It's a shame though as NLOTH is a truly great album. U2 also could have sold more with a holiday release. Holiday sales probably would have NLOTH up at least another million - maybe two million - units worldwide.

Still, even with holiday sales, overall music sales are down. People will buy a song, not the album, not the artist.

I guess if U2 want to stay super-relevant, their next goal is to produce another ultra-catchy sure thing hit that will get 2M downloads on iTunes.

While that's fine, I'd rather have a bluesy, more experimental album like NLOTH.

thank you. i always enjoy your posts. they're about as level-headed as you can get.

 

[last unicorn]

Great post, drwho! Sums up so much what I think about U2 and the new album and music in general.

 

[Purplereign]

nicely said doctorwho

 

[YBORCITY]

nicely said doctorwho

Indeed

But one must say will Bono be okay?

 

[Salome]

"- for me, it happened around 1988 -"

so the guy has waited for 20+ years to be able to get this out there?
his work here is done

 

[doctorwho]

Indeed

But one must say will Bono be okay?

God, I hope so. Poor Bono.

And thanks for the compliments (everyone).

To clarify one point in my post, I meant to say that while Eminem had the biggest first week sales in the U.S. thus far in 2009, he still sold less worldwide than U2 in their respective albums' first week.

And that was a surprise to me. Here's a guy that's supposed to be "hip" with the kids with a major album anticipation. Yet, he only sould about 125K more copies of his album than U2 did in the U.S. (and he did similar promotion to U2, with lots of TV appearances, and more) and about 300K less than U2 worldwide. Eminem had the hit songs. So why the poor album sales?

It's clear that album sales are down - way down. And people don't care about albums any more.

U2's strategy of making albums full of hit songs for ATYCLB and HTDAAB might be the way to go for all artists. It seems the idea of a solid album is gone - just get a throw-away hit song.

The odd part of this is that even when U2 did write "singles", they still created some great music. There were no "Single Ladies" or "My Life Would Suck Without You" type of silliness out there.

But all of this is irrelevant as clearly I'm a "crazy fan".

I hope Bono will be O.K.

 

[Jamila]

Wish someone could write an article like this about Ac/Dc or some hack dinosaur "artist" who seem to be going on forever...

What about the Stones who genuinely stand for nothing.

Who is this Harris wanker anyway, sounds like one of the anti-U2 lobby. Doesn't mention bugger all about the music on NLOTH. Obviously has a problem or a prejudice with Bono for some reason. Someone who can't hack the fact that U2 and Bono have contributed more to the well-being of society than most politicans.

U2 had nothing to do with Britain's New Labour anyway, Noel Gallagher did at first and then realised how crap they were. U2 always have been beyond all talk no walk clowns lke Bliar and most political parties.

Bollocks article.

Thank you socceroo, doctorwho & everybody else who understands that while the world will still be here tomorrow irregardless of how many nasty articles like this is written about U2

that there is nothing wrong and everything right about simply stating your support for the band that you profess that you love - no matter what people think of you.



You don't have to answer these critics back but if you do, I am sure that it is appreciated by the band.

No matter how much people mau think that they don't care about what is said about them, U2 is as human of a band as any other group and to catch all this negativity this year from so many "music journalists" and others can't make them pleased.



Bono has often talked about in interviews how much he is affected by what others think & say about him & the music that he is a part of, of how nervous he is before a performance & a tour wondering if people will come to see U2 and/or buy their music, etc -

so don't answer these critics in their newspapers if you don't want to but please don't also make light of this stuff

because it apparently DOES bother Bono and perhaps the rest of the band!



And I am NOT a "crazy U2 fan" - just one who actually reads & listens to the interviews that the band gives.



Have a good night.

 

[indra]

^

So what you're saying is Bono isn't OK?

 

[zwervers2]

U2 have lost their edge and should quietly fade away - Music - Entertainment

I was incensed by this. Aussies & anyone else please respond by email to smh with your views on this article. This is one of the widest circulations in Australia & it's very unfair criticism IMO.
AND this 2nd hand article derives from The Guardian UK actually.

Oh my God, my life is officialy over now that I have read this.

Sad thing is, he is partially right.

Who cares anyway. Have a nice day everyone

 

[Tommy WM]

The douce probably gave the Pussy Cat Dolls and Pink a great review...anyway everyone knows people from New South Wales are wankers!

 

[last unicorn]

Sad thing is, he is partially right.

Sad for whom? Not for me, because I don't agree with what the guy writes.

Obviously we had a slow news day and someone felt he had to write a crappy article because he's having a personal problem with the band and their music. I don't care, honestly, I think it's sad we're giving stuff like that attention by discussing it.

 

[zwervers2]

. I don't care, honestly, I think it's sad we're giving stuff like that attention by discussing it.

Who gives a crap about musicjournalists opinions. Wether they are over the moon about the new record or think it is a pathetic effort. Who cares.
Just listen to the music and enjoy it or not.

 

[blueeyedgirl]

^

So what you're saying is Bono isn't OK?

I'm heartbroken that U2 didn't sell 24 bazillion copies of the album but only sold 7 gazillion.

That means Bono won't get to update his Maserati and will have to keep driving the 2006 model....

 

[youarenotimmune]

Their last single, the unfortunately titled Magnificent, sold a mere 4000 copies in its first week and crept into the British charts at a miserable No. 42, their worst performance since 1982. No Line On The Horizon has reportedly sold fewer copies than the latest effort by those popular but not exactly titanic dance music veterans the Prodigy.

Premise = U2's latest album and subsequent singles haven't sold well
Conclusion = U2 have lost their edge. They are nothing more than an irrelevant oldies act now.

Well I have to say that is some really solid reasoning there! Criticism of art is sharpest when it is grounded in measures of commercial success. Well done Mr. John Harris, well done!

 

[indra]

I'm heartbroken that U2 didn't sell 24 bazillion copies of the album but only sold 7 gazillion.

That means Bono won't get to update his Maserati and will have to keep driving the 2006 model....

Poor, poor Bono.

Life just isn't fair.

 

[Purplereign]

so . . . .


is Bono ok?

 

[last unicorn]

I'm heartbroken that U2 didn't sell 24 bazillion copies of the album but only sold 7 gazillion.

That means Bono won't get to update his Maserati and will have to keep driving the 2006 model....

For Bono it's actually safer to just walk.

Maybe we should be thankful. Phew.

 

[Purplereign]

^

 

[last unicorn]

so . . . .


is Bono ok?

With a headline like that it should actually be:

Is Edge okay?

 

[eviltwin]

I'm heartbroken that U2 didn't sell 24 bazillion copies of the album but only sold 7 gazillion.

That means Bono won't get to update his Maserati and will have to keep driving the 2006 model....

I really need them to sell another few trazillion or so, 'cause I need a new avatar

As far as this supposed "review" is concerned, I think music critics are feeling the end of their rule over musicdom nearing, rubbish cut-and-pastes like these are nothing but their last dying moves.

 

[Galeongirl]

For Bono it's actually safer to just walk.

Maybe we should be thankful. Phew.

For Bono??? How about for everyone passing him while he's driving?

 

[last unicorn]

^ That's right. For Bono and everyone within his reach.

 

[phillyfan26]

I disagree.

First, this author gets to spew forth his opinion to the masses. Isn't a reader then entitled to counter? Does one have to be a "crazy fan" in order to disagree? Does one have to be a "hater" to not enjoy the album?

If NLOTH was another version of ATYCLB, I would agree. It's not. In fact, I feel it's the most adventurous U2 have been in over a decade. I further feel that it has some of U2's best work since the 80's and early 90's.

Additionally, when I listen to music, whether it's the coined sound of the Jonas Brothers, the lullaby rock of Coldplay, the stolen riffs of Beyonce, the mimicry of others by Justin Timberlake, the regurgitation of Eminem, the boredom of Kelly Clarkson, or the countless rock bands that sound just like U2, I am hard-pressed to look at NLOTH and say that U2 have "lost their edge". When that album is viewed with other popular acts today, it leaps out as fresh, not stale. Hence, the author's comments do come across as more of a "hater" rather than a true evaluation of the work.

But perhaps this is just a view of a "crazy fan" who has no right expressing his views of why NLOTH is indeed a sound album. We should definitely agree with all negative reviews, regardless of whether they are sound comments or not, because "who cares".

This is a huge twisting of my words to make it sound like I said something I did not, which is surprising considering you're usually a rational poster.

I said you'd have to be a crazy fan to e-mail the author to tell them you disagree and that they're being "unfair."

Most of what you're saying seems to be a disagreement of opinion, which is perfectly fine. In fact, guess what? I really, really enjoyed No Line on the Horizon. I think it's perfectly fine and reasonable to disagree with a reviewer. But to e-mail him and accuse him of being unfair because he didn't like the album seems way over the top, and only makes U2 fans look worse.

 

[Catman]

Honestly, is there a current popular band more polarizing than U2? Sadly, this leads many to jump on whatever bandwagon is popular atm without deciding for themselves. I really do find people's perceptions of the band/ Bono to be incredibly interesting.