Possible Directions for U2

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

VintagePunk

Blue Crack Distributor
Joined
Jan 23, 2005
Messages
55,743
Location
In a dry and waterless place
For the past decade, U2 have been searching for that elusive hit. Many have said that with the advent of the internet, and all the ways to access music now, musical tastes have become more niche, more divergent. Unless you're some sort of mainstream artist like Taylor Swift (it pains me to type that - and as someone who doesn't follow mainstream charts, I have no idea if that's even accurate, it's just an example of a name I hear a lot), that success probably isn't forthcoming....nor is it desired, imo.

Anyway, if U2 could let go of all of that, and just record what they want, without caring about chart success or relevance, which direction would you like them to take?

For me, it would be something akin to the Million Dollar Hotel Soundtrack. I pretty much love all of the songs on that, and all of the songs credited to Bono or U2, I feel like they're in their wheelhouse, and would be wildly popular, albeit maybe to a niche audience.

Where would you like them to go?
 
I think it would be an excellent time to record Passengers volume 2 and 3. Make some music for the art fag in you as Bono would say.
 
Not acoustic, but something more organic somewhere in the vein between 2 shots and North and the South of the River.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
For me, it would be something akin to the Million Dollar Hotel Soundtrack. I pretty much love all of the songs on that, and all of the songs credited to Bono or U2, I feel like they're in their wheelhouse, and would be wildly popular, albeit maybe to a niche audience.

Where would you like them to go?
That sounds good to me.

When NLOTH was being recorded, I was hoping it would be a niche album - interesting textures, experimental songwriting, cohesive sound and theme. Songs like Stateless, The Ground Beneath Her Feet, Never Let Me Go, Moment of Surrender, Fez-Being Born, Soon, etc. Something that lives and dies on the merits of the music alone. I thought maybe U2 had entered the "legacy" part of their career - would stop dressing like 20-somethings and stop chasing pop hits.

Sadly, that boat seems to have sailed. The band may be shameless in their intentions re: "relevance", but at this point, they also lack any dignity. I doubt they will be perceived as credible musicians ever again.
 
Sadly, that boat seems to have sailed. The band may be shameless in their intentions re: "relevance", but at this point, they also lack any dignity. I doubt they will be perceived as credible musicians ever again.
Double sadly, I'm afraid this is largely true.

I personally think the recent album is quite good, and is overall a better recording from a musical/artistic standpoint than anything since Zooropa. Unfortunately, it's only going to be remembered for the iTunes P.R.-disaster.

It's hard to understand how U2 jumped the shark in terms of public perception. They were once the poster-boys for musical integrity and non-commercial (non-corporate sponsored) popular music with integrity and passion. They have somehow become the poster-boys for the exact opposite.
 
Make good music.

I'd be okay with sell-out pop music or whatever if it sounds like ATYCLB. SOI's songs are just weak.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
It's hard to understand how U2 jumped the shark in terms of public perception. They were once the poster-boys for musical integrity and non-commercial (non-corporate sponsored) popular music with integrity and passion. They have somehow become the poster-boys for the exact opposite.

I can't understand why people struggle with this. They're four extremely uncool white guys led by a bloke who attracts scorn because of sunglasses and egolomania. They're all in their 50s and they are trying to compete with the top 40. It is perfectly obvious to me why they are disliked.

The difference between me and many posters on this forum is I long ago stopped caring. I don't like SoI much, but U2 will always be my favourite band. If they retired tomorrow I wouldn't be bothered.

That said, I agree with the OP in that if they just dropped their pretensions of being relevant and just made good music that they wanted to make it would be great.

And I think that's the really ironic, sad thing - they're compromising themselves in this chase for relevance. If they gave that up and just made good music they want to make, without all the bells and whistles of announcements with Apple and so on, they would probably be getting a far better reception.
 
I actually don't have too much problem with their music or artistic direction.

Considering their music in the last 10 years, I consider all of the following to be of great quality and wouldn't mind them if they kept doing it:

*Mercy, Fez
*COBL, Breathe, Winter, EBW
*No Line, Volcano, Reach Me Now
*Cedarwood Road, Wolves
*MOS, SLABT, Troubles
*Crazy Tonight, Crystal Ballroom

I'd only wish that both they and the fans stopped caring so much about the public perception.

Between Bono and the band wishing to be hugely relevant again (which is not going to happen) and the fans wishing that U2 somehow become either some sort of a hipsterish underground respected band (which is not going to happen) or a huge massive popular act (which is not going to happen), the whole U2 community lives in constant frustration instead of enjoying what imho are really good songs that enriches the already great catalog of a great band like U2.


Oh, and I'd wish that as a consequence of that, they'd dare to release albums more often, even if they feel that they're not 100% ready.
 
Between Bono and the band wishing to be hugely relevant again (which is not going to happen) and the fans wishing that U2 somehow become either some sort of a hipsterish underground respected band (which is not going to happen) or a huge massive popular act (which is not going to happen), the whole U2 community lives in constant frustration instead of enjoying what imho are really good songs that enriches the already great catalog of a great band like U2.

:shocked: Well, that sounds rather reasonable.
 
I actually don't have too much problem with their music or artistic direction.

Considering their music in the last 10 years, I consider all of the following to be of great quality and wouldn't mind them if they kept doing it:

*Mercy, Fez
*COBL, Breathe, Winter, EBW
*No Line, Volcano, Reach Me Now
*Cedarwood Road, Wolves
*MOS, SLABT, Troubles
*Crazy Tonight, Crystal Ballroom

I'd only wish that both they and the fans stopped caring so much about the public perception.

Between Bono and the band wishing to be hugely relevant again (which is not going to happen) and the fans wishing that U2 somehow become either some sort of a hipsterish underground respected band (which is not going to happen) or a huge massive popular act (which is not going to happen), the whole U2 community lives in constant frustration instead of enjoying what imho are really good songs that enriches the already great catalog of a great band like U2.


Oh, and I'd wish that as a consequence of that, they'd dare to release albums more often, even if they feel that they're not 100% ready.


Well said, totally agree


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
When you've been the benchmark for something, on top of the mountain, as they have been for so long, there's really only one direction they could go. Too many business models have proven this.

I'm sure they would love to have that giant huge hit but if it doesn't happen they really shouldn't keep chasing it. Just make the music you want to make because that's what you were born to do. As others have said.

You are already legends, you're already in the R&R HOF for goodness sakes. Anything else at this point is icing on the cake to a career 99.9% of people in the business would give their right arm for.

Of course maybe these guys really enjoy writing songs for someone or about Volcanoes or whatever. If that's the case, well fine, guess its better than writing about Battlestar Galactica.
 
Honestly, I'd rather they just embraced being a nostalgia act. No new albums, just tours, performing the songs they're proud of, that they enjoy, that are fan favourites. I don't need new U2 in my life and I wouldn't be fussed if they never released another new song, but I'd love to go to a gig and hear 11 O'clock Tick Tock or A Sort of Homecoming or Love Is Blindness or Exit or whatever. U2 have always been a better band live than in studio anyway.
 
I'm sure they would love to have that giant huge hit but if it doesn't happen they really shouldn't keep chasing it. Just make the music you want to make because that's what you were born to do. As others have said.

But what it they want to make 'hits' or songs that people might actually like? Why should we assume that they would automatically make songs that either don't have vocal hooks or prominent guitars on them if the commercial factor were no longer factored in?
 
I would just love to hear 5 minutes instrumental songs with TONS (I mean, TONS) of solos from the Edge. This needs to happen.
 
All I know is as long as they don't make music exactly the way I want it at exactly that moment of time they are selling out their souls instead of following their creative muse.
As their creative muse, obviously, completely coincides with my subjective take on music.
:up:
 
All I know is as long as they don't make music exactly the way I want it at exactly that moment of time they are selling out their souls instead of following their creative muse.
As their creative muse, obviously, completely coincides with my subjective take on music.
:up:

U2 can follow their creative muse and do commercials for Burger King. That doesn't mean that there would have to be a problem with U2 following their creative muse, it would mean that there would be a problem, for many of their fans, with what their creative muse has become.
 
All I know is as long as they don't make music exactly the way I want it at exactly that moment of time they are selling out their souls instead of following their creative muse.
As their creative muse, obviously, completely coincides with my subjective take on music.
:up:


Thank you.
 
But what it they want to make 'hits' or songs that people might actually like? Why should we assume that they would automatically make songs that either don't have vocal hooks or prominent guitars on them if the commercial factor were no longer factored in?

I hate to have to point this out (actually that's not true; I love it), but there's a shitton of music that does not reach number one in the charts that also happens to have vocal hooks, prominent guitars, and what the hey, melodies also. It's not all atonal kraut art/fuck.
 
All I know is as long as they don't make music exactly the way I want it at exactly that moment of time they are selling out their souls instead of following their creative muse.
As their creative muse, obviously, completely coincides with my subjective take on music.
:up:

:up:





I hate to have to point this out (actually that's not true; I love it), but there's a shitton of music that does not reach number one in the charts that also happens to have vocal hooks, prominent guitars, and what the hey, melodies also. It's not all atonal kraut art/fuck.
Sure, U2 is one example.
 
I hate to have to point this out (actually that's not true; I love it), but there's a shitton of music that does not reach number one in the charts that also happens to have vocal hooks, prominent guitars, and what the hey, melodies also. It's not all atonal kraut art/fuck.

:up:
 
Honestly, I'd rather they just embraced being a nostalgia act. No new albums, just tours, performing the songs they're proud of, that they enjoy, that are fan favourites. I don't need new U2 in my life and I wouldn't be fussed if they never released another new song, but I'd love to go to a gig and hear 11 O'clock Tick Tock or A Sort of Homecoming or Love Is Blindness or Exit or whatever. U2 have always been a better band live than in studio anyway.
I like this idea.

Yeah, I think they did this a few years ago. Some experimental concept album called No Line On the Horizon.
You really don't think that album was compromised at all? The way the band talked about it before its release, as well as all the videos of the band playing the songs, definitely did not match the final product... Not to mention U2 delaying the album's release to spend 6 months reworking Crazy Tonight.
 
r1wxPzh.jpg
 
Back
Top Bottom