Bono interview with Irish Times

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Bono said:
That’s despite the fact that No Line doesn’t have a Beautiful Day and doesn’t have a Stuck in a Moment. There’s no pop song on No Line , but it’s still sold that amount. It’s been an amazing success for an album which is quite a complex piece of work and doesn’t have one pop song on it.
That's despite the fact NLOTH doesn't have a Stuck in a Moment... In what world is Stuck beloved by U2 fans? And does he really think there are no pop songs on NLOTH? From what I recall, the band spent a good six months at production's end getting Crazy Tonight and SUC just right. Maybe what he meant to say is that NLOTH didn't have any hit pop songs.

Bono said:
People say Get on Your Boots was the wrong single, but it’s great live. Unfortunately, in the last few weeks of finishing the album, we didn’t have the objectivity. We figured out Get on Your Boots later, when we were on the road, and it became a much better song.
Wow, I can't believe Bono is still holding this song up. If I had to choose the one thing that likely doomed NLOTH (as much as it was 'doomed'; that is to say, not much at all - it's a U2 album, for heaven's sake), it would be the release of GOYB as first single. It's an extremely goofy, throwaway rock song, with Bono willingly throwing all caution to the wind and doing a white-boy rap about ice cream and sexy boots. One of U2's mantras this decade has been to not be afraid of being embarrassing (eg. Bono wanted to write a song called 'I Love You' for ATYCLB), and I admire that, but GOYB definitely takes the cake on that account. Why he or any of the band thought this song would go down well is beyond me.

And what is this about the song improving live? From what I can tell it's the same live, except Bono can't keep up and is out of breath. Fine, if the song not being 'finished' is his excuse, whatever. I guess it would hurt badly to admit they just Discotheque'd themselves all over again.

Bono said:
We can play the big music in big places. But whether we can play the small music, meaning for the small speakers of the radio or clubs, where people are living, remains to be seen. I think we have to go to that place again if we’re to survive.
Big music in big places... does he think people attended 'big' 360 shows to hear the 'big' music from NLOTH? No, they wanted to hear the 'big' music from their best albums. And small speakers, where people are living = radio and clubs? Right. Because radio doesn't reach everywhere, and clubs are so intimate. Nice & crafty way to spin his desire for hits into sounding like artistic integrity.

Bono said:
The whole point of being in U2 is that we’re not here to be an art-house band. Our job, as we see it, is to bring the art house to the mainstream; our job is to puncture the mainstream.
With NLOTH, unfortunately, the band didn't so much use their position to puncture the mainstream and feed the public fresh, creative music as they did dive into the tried-and-tested U2 sound, then stare back through a glass wall at the interesting sounds they'd originally aspired to and left behind.

Bono, you annoy me. Please read my post carefully and think about what you've done.

and they don't need to worry about getting attention when they do come back....u2 has a sort of iconic status that any new release is going to be treated as an "event" whether it's in 2012 or 2013 or beyond. Whether it's good or not and can sell beyond that is another story of course.
Yup. People will buy it. U2 have a built-in audience, and someone is always listening. Bono doesn't seem to realize that. When you've got so many ears, why not give them something daring? Why not "abuse your position"? I think what people ask about a mammoth act like U2 is: have they still got it? Is the new album good, or not? Does it hold up to their best? Have they held on to their integrity? Not, is U2 hitting the pop charts... No-one cares about that. I bet if they'd released an uncompromising, daring album, word of mouth would have done wonders.

But even conceding that being "out of the limelight" is one path to irrelevance for u2, an even more direct path is to quickly release an album that no one really likes or buys...i think bono conceded as much when he said something along the lines of "we don't want the next thing the public hears from u2 to be an art record."
So basically what he's saying is WE WANT HITS OM NOM NOM Who cares if a new U2 album doesn't set the world on fire? First and foremost I think it should set the band's world on fire. It should excite them, and if it's good work, then music fans will love it. That would place the band in a different kind of light, but it's a light nonetheless. And anyway, shouldn't they be excited to enter that stage of their career where they can do whatever they please and have an audience? Regarding being huge, they've been there, done that. If I was 50 and just come off the hugest tour, I'd jump at the chance to tone things down. Watching Bono and Edge w/ a string section at the Clinton fundraiser, I thought to myself: hey, maybe this could work. It's not the future of rock 'n' roll, but it could be the future of U2. It's a legitimate direction they could take. :shrug: Time to relax and make the music they want to, without becoming complacent or resting on laurels.

At this point, they can play the hit game. They can play the monster-reinvention game if they want, too. These two approaches might even coincide, if they adopt the sound of modern radio. (While that idea interests me, I'm sure it would be the death of U2 as people would finally get the chance to unequivocally cry 'sell-out'.) But with NLOTH, it's hard to tell if they even had a game.

If they hadn't gotten cold feet before the end, and putting things like Crazy Tonight, Stand-Up Comedy on there, failing to complete Winter, and toning down some of the more exotic elements on something like Magnificent, we might have wound up with an album that, marketed correctly (and with better reviews, I'm sure) could have crossed cultural lines and shown a U2 to the public that wasn't retreading over the same ground.
Exactly (and much more succinct than I managed). =P
 
Boots was much better live, it worked well and was fun to hear. They just found a groove and went with it there. And it doesn't have the cringeworthy "sexy boots" lyric anymore.
 
meh

enough of the self-indulgent whining, B-man...

they're either passionate about making music or they're not. end of. :shrug:
 
Reading Bono's comments again, I think we can expect a new album filled to the brim with Crazy Tonights and WITS. The man just seems so damn obsessed with having hit singles and selling "12 million". I'm utterly gobsmacked he thinks NLOTH's 5m sales somehow translates to 12m in this alternate universe of adjusted figures. It really shows where his head is at right now.
I hate to be so pessimistic, but it's looks like they will burn through several producers (sorry, Danger Mouse), start farting around with RedOne and Will.I.am, eventually call in Lillywhite for touch-ups and deliver a stinker in late 2013. And the tragedy is they are still capable of great music if only they stop chasing this phantasm known as "relevance".
 
You have to be foolish to not think sales figures have changed drastically, and yes 2.5 is close to the factor I've seen used by industry experts.

And to think we're going to have an album of CTs is quite silly given the fact that it wasn't even close to a hit.
 
And to think we're going to have an album of CTs is quite silly given the fact that it wasn't even close to a hit.

yeah. it's amazing to me that people think the next album will be all about Crazy Tonights. They didn't even play the album version of it more a couple of times, and only once on the tour itself -- and that's only because they were filming a music video.

and then the songs that Bono holds in the highest regard off of No Line are Unknown Caller and Moment of Surrender. and he likes the live version of Boots.

Yet, somehow that equates to more crazy tonights?
 
Dear Mr BONO,

please do me a favour and stop talking NONSENSE!
otherwise some of the all blacks will tackle YOU:sexywink:
to be honest, paul hewson aka BONO VOX you are a bit of a loudmouth.
restart your main business and make some kind of good quality music with your bandmates and please stop trying to be a bad copy of a crappy band called coldplay!
go to work and do it right, but please please only talk again about your music on the day you have an quality(!) album ready for the people.

Kind regards
jacobus
 
Dear Mr BONO,

please do me a favour and stop talking NONSENSE!
otherwise some of the all blacks will tackle YOU:sexywink:
to be honest, paul hewson aka BONO VOX you are a bit of a loudmouth.
restart your main business and make some kind of good quality music with your bandmates and please stop trying to be a bad copy of a crappy band called coldplay!
go to work and do it right, but please please only talk again about your music on the day you have an quality(!) album ready for the people.

Kind regards
jacobus

Since you're in Germany, and this is Achtung Baby we're talking about, I'll just bite my tongue and let this slide without comment. :)
 
Since you're in Germany, and this is Achtung Baby we're talking about, I'll just bite my tongue and let this slide without comment. :)
this thread isn't about AB. this thread is about BONOs vision of some future (marketing)stuff (the irish times interview). he shouldn't talk too much of this crap, instead he should record some new fresh quality music. and he should increase his poor talent he showed with the lyrics on the last few albums.
 
yeah. it's amazing to me that people think the next album will be all about Crazy Tonights. They didn't even play the album version of it more a couple of times, and only once on the tour itself -- and that's only because they were filming a music video.

and then the songs that Bono holds in the highest regard off of No Line are Unknown Caller and Moment of Surrender. and he likes the live version of Boots.

Yet, somehow that equates to more crazy tonights?

Obviously they won't go consciously looking for another Crazy Tonight, but they may well go looking for another Beautiful Day. And in trying too hard to find another Beautiful Day, they may well end up with contrived pop songs. That's probably how CT came into existence - they were trying too hard to find a big hit single, and I fear they will do so again.
But as you rightly stated, Bono holds MOS and UC in high regard, which is a hopeful sign.
 
Obviously they won't go consciously looking for another Crazy Tonight, but they may well go looking for another Beautiful Day. And in trying too hard to find another Beautiful Day, they may well end up with contrived pop songs. That's probably how CT came into existence - they were trying too hard to find a big hit single, and I fear they will do so again.
But as you rightly stated, Bono holds MOS and UC in high regard, which is a hopeful sign.

Yeah. Actually, what they want are hits. I think Bono would prefer that the hits sound like MOS (as would I), but they'll just as quickly settle for hits that sound like Vertigo or Stuck...and if Crazy Tonight was a hit, they'd be happy w/that as well.

Speaking of how much Bono loves MOS and UC (abandoned), anyone care to guess which NLOTH songs get played (if any) on the next tour (if there is one)?
 
Sadly, Boots will likely remain in the set (and I actually like the song).

I can't imagine MOS remaining as it simply wasn't a "popular" song outside the fanbase. And that's something I'll probably never forgive the band for. That thing would easily have won Grammy awards had it received the single treatment, esp. a lead single.

Magnificent will probably be back as well.

What I would really like to happen is for them to try and give Breathe another shot. I still don't understand how a song is good enough to open the entire show and then gets the boot completely. And the title track SHOULD be in there as well, but probably won't.
 
CT does not fit any contrived pop structure, you can say a lot of things about that song, but that's not one of them. CT gets lazily categorized in here as contrived pop when it really isn't, there's nothing really contrived about it's wordy chorus or structure.
 
Sadly, Boots will likely remain in the set (and I actually like the song).

I can't imagine MOS remaining as it simply wasn't a "popular" song outside the fanbase. And that's something I'll probably never forgive the band for. That thing would easily have won Grammy awards had it received the single treatment, esp. a lead single.

Magnificent will probably be back as well.

What I would really like to happen is for them to try and give Breathe another shot. I still don't understand how a song is good enough to open the entire show and then gets the boot completely. And the title track SHOULD be in there as well, but probably won't.

I think MOS is the best song 00's U2 made. That's just my opinion, I readily acknowledge that it doesn't have the pure pop potential of a BD or Vertigo...but man, that song is transcendent. I'm actually impressed they stuck w/it through every show on that tour. And it was a perfect closer.

But you're right, we're likely to never hear it again live, at least regularly, as aside from a closer I don't see where it fits into a show.
 
CT does not fit any contrived pop structure, you can say a lot of things about that song, but that's not one of them. CT gets lazily categorized in here as contrived pop when it really isn't, there's nothing really a contrived about it's wordy chorus or structure.

This is pretty much true. Don't me wrong, I personally think each and every version of the song sucks, but I agree it's not your typical pop song.
 
Wow, I can't believe Bono is still holding this song up. If I had to choose the one thing that likely doomed NLOTH (as much as it was 'doomed'; that is to say, not much at all - it's a U2 album, for heaven's sake), it would be the release of GOYB as first single. It's an extremely goofy, throwaway rock song, with Bono willingly throwing all caution to the wind and doing a white-boy rap about ice cream and sexy boots.

Agreed. I personally have nothing against the song, but I have heard a few negative comments from casual fans - people who say it put them off buying the album. It is not the type of song to tempt back lapsed fans or part-time fans, it's not a Sweetest Thing or a Beautiful Day or a Fly.
 
I think MOS is the best song 00's U2 made. That's just my opinion, I readily acknowledge that it doesn't have the pure pop potential of a BD or Vertigo...but man, that song is transcendent. I'm actually impressed they stuck w/it through every show on that tour. And it was a perfect closer.

But you're right, we're likely to never hear it again live, at least regularly, as aside from a closer I don't see where it fits into a show.

Well, I agree on the first point. It's my favorite alongside Mercy, another great song that didn't get its proper moment in the sun.

I don't think it was the perfect closer, though. And that's primarily because it WASN'T a big single and I couldn't feel the entire stadium vibing on it like they should have.

Didn't the band close a lot of the JT tour with WOWY? Could have had the same effect here.
 
I think 40 was the usual closer for the JT tour.

I'm sure I'll be corrected within seconds if this is wrong. ;)
 
It was 3 years between Pop and ATYCLB, then 4 years until Bomb, then 5 years until NLOTH (unless I'm mistaken). 2012 will "only" be 3 years since their last album...I'm not saying they can't, or don't need do to this, but it definitely would mean drastically changing their current work habits.

Actually Christmas 2012 would be "normal" for a U2 gap between albums since the 90's.

Zooropa to Pop - just 3 months short of 4 years
Pop to ATYCLB - just 4 months short of 4 years
ATYCLB to Bomb - right on 4 years
Bomb to NLOTH - just 3 months longer than 4 years
NLOTH to Xmas '12 - just 3 months short of 4 years

(I know we've had other collaborations like OST and MDH in between, but 4 years is par for the course for fully fledged U2 albums for almost 20 years now)

If there's nothing til Xmas 2013 that will be almost 5 years, by far the longest gap in U2 history. That'd also be extremely ironic since they (virtually) had a follow-up album in the bag when they released NLOTH.
 
It's really just a Larry problem.

Simple as that. We could have said the same thing 20 years ago.
Hear me now, believe me later.
 
(I know we've had other collaborations like OST and MDH in between, but 4 years is par for the course for fully fledged U2 albums for almost 20 years now)

M$H only had the full band on 2 songs.

OST, however, was a COMPLETE album of 14 tracks, with the band participating in writing and playing everything.

It's not officially a U2 album, but to say they took a four year break between Zooropa and Pop is just untrue. They released an album's worth of new material, whatever name it was under.
 
I can't for the life of me understand why some people don't give Passengers the credit it's due. All four of them played on it. It's a U2 album.

I guess it's just too out-there for some people.
 
lazarus said:
M$H only had the full band on 2 songs.

OST, however, was a COMPLETE album of 14 tracks, with the band participating in writing and playing everything.

It's not officially a U2 album, but to say they took a four year break between Zooropa and Pop is just untrue. They released an album's worth of new material, whatever name it was under.

I don't really care either way. Start the "4 years per album" cycle at Pop then, I don't give a shit. My point is still valid.

But it bugs me when people think the "MDH Band" (U2 plus Lanois with guests) is totally different to Passengers (U2 plus Eno with guests), and therefore denounce MDH while accepting OST. Very strange.
 
For the one's that can't read (or like to twist people's words):

1. I don't care either way if OST is classed as U2 or Passengers
2. It bugs me when people treat OST different to MDH (since they're both side projects with non-Bono vocals on multiple tracks yadayada..)

Simple enough?

Ouch. Someone is grumpy. The totality of my post was "So which is it", followed by a :). Just a little humour, no need for personal insults.

Sorry, didn't mean to bug ya.
 
I can't for the life of me understand why some people don't give Passengers the credit it's due. All four of them played on it. It's a U2 album.

I guess it's just too out-there for some people.

It's very simple. It's not a U2 album because they are not the listed artist. It's Passengers, and that's U2 and Brian Eno. Though, TBH it's U2 - Larry + drum machine.
 
M$H features U2 playing/writing as a band on TWO tracks: TGBHF and Stateless. The cover of Anarchy in the UK only features Adam and Larry. The rest of the songs only have Bono and a bunch of sessions musicians, including Lanois, who is NOT in U2.

So it's not the same as Passengers. At all.
 
Back
Top Bottom