No Line On the Horizon-The most underrated album not just by U2 but music in general.

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
A

asr

Acrobat
Joined
Aug 22, 2004
Messages
396
I just returned to this album today after a one-month break. Not only was I in awe of how soul-stirring, exhilerating, and epic it was to me when I first heard it on Feb. '09, but everytime I've listen to it since that moment I still feel those aforementioned sensations. I know I'm in the minority here but from the jarring assault of the title track to the last syllable uttered on 'Ceders of Lebanon', I don't find a bad note played or sung on 90% on NLOTH [I personaly never liked 'Crazy' or 'Stand Up Comedy' but I digress]. I know it may not be a perfect record but I'm very baffled by how much indifference/hatred it ended up getting by the press, the public, and to a lesser degree now, U2 themselves.

Does any other U2 fan share the above sentiment I have for what I feel is the most underrated recording done by any artist much less U2.
 
No, I don't need to be drunk to appreciate such a great album. Just because you and the majority of the people don't doesn't mean that there aren't a few people who do. You know, the very people who I asked to share this thread with me, not smart-alec fuck faces like you.
 
asr said:
No, I don't need to be drunk to appreciate such a great album. Just because you and the majority of the people don't doesn't mean that there aren't a few people who do. You know, the very people who I asked to share this thread with me, not smart-alec fuck faces like you.
Click to expand...

i like the album... but a lot of these threads seem to crop up when people have spent the night drinking.
 
Sorry for getting defensive there. I just thought you were one of those people who accuse others of being drunk when they don't agree with you.
 
Personally, I think the "most underrated U2 album" would have to be either Pop or NLOTH. I can't pick between the two.
Also, I think Congratulations by MGMT is pretty underrated. The public opinion on that one seems to be slowly improving, though.
 
As with 100% of "underrated" threads in history, the problem with this topic is that the writer has failed to contextualize how he/she understands that word. Do you mean underrated by the music-world at large (in particular, in sales)?; do you mean underrated by U2 fans?; do you mean underrated by critics; do you mean underrated by U2 themselves?

As the post above hints at, the critical reaction to the album was very strong (but then again, it was the same for the two previous albums as well).

According to U2 fans, the album seems to have a very positive response as well. Based on that, I would say it is somewhat overrated by a lot of U2 fans, as I don't think it's a particularly strong album.

The music world at large did seem to be somewhat un-bothered with the record -- and certainly with its singles -- but I think that has more to do with the current musical climate and the fact that U2 (read: McGuinness) were way over-exposed in 2004-2009.

As for the band themselves: I've not been following their tour, but my understanding is that they're down to playing maybe 4 songs from the record, live? Is that right? If so, I do think they're "underrating" it. There are easily 5 or 6 first-rate songs there, and even the average ones I'd rather hear that some done-to-death shit like 'New Year's Day'. But that's just me.
 
NLOTH got a lot of critical acclaim and many fans seemed to love it, including me, I still love it a lot. However, it wasn't embraced by mainstream radio or by people who only like "classic" U2. I wouldn't say that's called "underrated". I've read many newspapers articles about the current tour that stated that NLOTH is one of their best album and should have gotten better response. If you mean "underrated" in form of "low sales figures", then yes, but certainly not by fans and critics.
 
Fans don't underrate it.

Critics didn't underrate it (some, e.g. Rolling Stone, overrated it).

The public were given Boots/Magnificent/Crazy and said "Thanks, but I'll pass", and I don't think that was a poor or unfair rating on their part, unfortunately.

So it's pretty much sitting in it's rightful place.
 
It wasn't just underrated by the public, it was totally ignored, which is very sad as it's a very good album.
I don't think it's underrated by fans or critics, I agree with Earnie's comments above.
 
NLOTH is one of my favourite albums, not only from U2, but from music in general.

I think it has been underrated only in terms of mainstream audience, not by critics and not by a great part of the fan base, although there are many fans who want U2 to remain in the 80s or the 90s forever.

I can understand why the general public didn't care about the album, from my point of view it has nothing to do with the choice of singles, they chose those songs which had a better chance to be appreciated by the casual listener, imagine the reaction if MOS, NLOTH and Breathe had been chosen instead, and those would have been my choice.

The thing is that this album doesn't follow the main streams currently high at sales and usually played in clubs, it is a dark, intimate album which you must listen to with calm (not only hear it, that's a big difference). I think the band realised it at a point and stoppped its release in autumn 2008 just to get some hits in it, which made the album less perfect and didn't help much in the term of sales, but we know them and we know they always want the whole dream: quality and sales together, experimental and mainstream, that's difficult, they've done it, sometimes, but it isn't always possible.

As it is not my money and taking into account that CD sales aren't as relevant as they used to be years ago, I would advise U2 (they don't need my advice, I know it) to write and record whatever songs they feel are good enough to be in a U2 album, money is now in the gigs, but their recordings will be their heritage to the world.
 
I think NLOTH is a wonderful album, and is the one I most often choose to listen to now. I also think Bono has a point when he states that it is not an easy listen - in terms of a lot of pop taste being essentially 'easy listening' these days - in that to be commercially successful something needs to be instantly appreciated. However I do not think it too high-brow or intellectually demanding a listen. It is not overly lyrically obtuse. It just gets better with repeated exposure, and is an album and not a collection of hits to be listened to in isolation.

NLOTH is one of those albums where when I think of it, or view the cover, I get a good feeling and do not consider it to be at all weak - other than perhaps Stand Up Comedy. Some of the sounds & moods contained within are pure genius - thinking of the rush of energy/desperation that is the title track, the beautiful Fez/Being Born, the underplayed White as Snow (they ought to give it an outing live) and the atmospheric Cedars. As for Moment of Surrender - that is developing into something very special and I love the violin/cello intro used now on the tour.

Above all I think U2 deserve a lot of kudos for putting out a record that is not formulaic i.e. that is a departure from past successes.
 
For underrated talk outside the fan base, I'm not sure about that. But compared to other albums of the band's, I think it's actually overrated if anything.
 
I don't know if it's underrated, just difficult to understand and compare in the context of previous albums. Most indifference from U2 fans on here (and in some of the critical reviews) seems to be in relation to the Crazy/Boots/Comedy trio in the middle. It seems to stimulate more of a "What's with that?" kinda reaction...

1. No Line
2. Magnificent
3. Moment
4. Unknown Caller
5. Fez
6. White As Snow
7. Breathe
8. Cedarse of Lebanon

An eight-track album of this nature was never gonna happen, but I think among U2 fans, this would have made a much less bemusing track listing, and made it easier to consider where the album sits in the context of all other U2 albums.

I love Boots, but I find it remarkable that it's on the same album as Moment Of Surrender, considering they both move me, but in polar opposite ways.

I think NLOTH is going to age very well regardless, for whatever it is. It's wine.
 
Or, those eight tracks + Winter + Soon + Every Breaking Wave + perhaps one or two others that we haven't heard, but surely exist and are surely better and more fitting than 'the middle three' + a more cohesive/rejigged running order? Could have been sublime. An album album, and a really, really good one.

And a warning: if you now come in here and say something moronic about how an album needs some dumb rock energy smashed into the middle of it, otherwise it's too, you know, moody, I promise I will fly to wherever you are tomorrow and throw a cream pie at your face. :wink:
 
NLOTH is an awesome album from beginning to end. Even its weak points has some strong points.

IGCIIDGCT: Not unique or special in any way, but the chorus is catchy and the "Baby, baby, baby"-part is excellent.
GOYB: A bit too similar to Vertigo (especially the verses) but has a pretty original arrangement and a few creative sections
SUC: Dull instrumental, but the vocals are pretty good if you ask me.

But underrated? I'll have to agree with what others has said. Underappreciated perhaps since it hasn't been mentioned nearly as much as the previous two albums, but most people who gave the entire album a shot (not only the singles) actually found it to be pretty good.
 
I don't think it's underrated by the majority of U2 fans. I get the feeling most people agree it's the greatest thing since Achtung Baby and/or Zooropa.

I still listen to a NLOTH track daily, Get On Your Boots and Magnificent both have at least 300 plays in my iTunes, and if we judge U2 albums solely on the first four songs, it's the best U2 album, seriously, NLOTH-Magnificent-MOS-UC is the most kick-ass quartet of songs they've has ever put together.

Underrated or no, most of us can agree that it's an incredible album.

*goes to put on NLOTH*

Oh, and Get on Your Boots is fucking awesome, screw the haters.
 
I don't think Get On Your Boots has too many haters around here, just many people who think it's out of place on that album, and that both coming after Vertigo and being such a bad guide for the rest of the album, it was a very poor choice for a lead single.
 
The way Boots is mixed doesn't sound quite right to me. If people are honest, there's no track on the album that would make a strong single that would appeal to a mass audience. Definitely not underrated, just doesn't have mainstream appeal.
 
The album's experience, from start to finish, is really something to marvel at. It doesn't feel underrated at all in that context.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Headache in a Suitcase
  • Sticky
U2 in Vegas - Tips for booking hotels, flights and other Vegasy type things.
20 21 22
Replies
642
Views
32K
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase
pacemaker
The Edge in Guitar World
Replies
5
Views
1K
cobl04
cobl04
H
Every Breaking Wave - has the full band version from the album ever been played live?
Replies
12
Views
2K
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase
B
Why have U2 had no new RIAA certifications in a LONG time?
Replies
1
Views
2K
codeguy
codeguy
Scrumtralescent
No Line On The Horizon: the most underrated album?
5 6 7
Replies
184
Views
14K
cobl04
cobl04

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom