All critical, "professional" reviews of SOI here, Pt. 2

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

Interesting article, but this was really daft:

When Bono told a Time magazine reporter in 2002 that the right to be ridiculous was something he held dear, he was criticizing himself, talking about how his ego gets in the way of being open to change. By the time he turned it into a lyric in 2009, he'd changed "be" to "appear" (letting that ego convince him that, on some level, he was being reasonable) and put it into a verse about changing the world.

He obviously didn't change the "be" to "appear", but I guess that's what you get when you use U2.com for your sources :wink: (it's shocking how many of the lyrics they've gotten wrong on there).
 

From the above article:

Hey, U2 fans, music lovers, and iPhone users… you’re invited! I’m joining Dr. Jeff Keuss and others on Monday night, October 13, for a live podcast conversation called “U2, Apple, and the Future of Music.” It’ll be at Hale’s Ales Brewery and Pub in Seattle’s Ballard neighborhood, and the dinner audience will be involved in the conversation, which will eventually be posted online. Want to join the conversation? Get your tickets here.


Cori, are you going to this?
 
http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2014/10/ozzy-osbourne-u2s-apple-album-was-fucking-selfish/#comments

Ozzy's at it now ?

Are the Osbournes that thick and stupid??? Do they not read the ins and outs of the apple deal before commenting on it??

Im fed up of hearing people say "u2 gave it away for free" they bloody didnt,they sold it for 100 million dollers. What act wouldnt do that???

Ozzy would jump at the chance to have a deal like that. Remember this is the same family that let cameras be put up in their home for alot of money to be on tv.

Complete prats!!!?
 
From the above article:

Hey, U2 fans, music lovers, and iPhone users… you’re invited! I’m joining Dr. Jeff Keuss and others on Monday night, October 13, for a live podcast conversation called “U2, Apple, and the Future of Music.” It’ll be at Hale’s Ales Brewery and Pub in Seattle’s Ballard neighborhood, and the dinner audience will be involved in the conversation, which will eventually be posted online. Want to join the conversation? Get your tickets here.


Cori, are you going to this?

DUDE. I hadn't heard/seen that. Thanks for sharing it! I'll see if I can make it. That's in my neighborhood.

... I hope I'm not going to be the only U2 defender there. :wink:
 
Ozzy Osbourne: U2's Apple Album Was "Fucking Selfish" | Gizmodo UK

Ozzy's at it now ?

Are the Osbournes that thick and stupid??? Do they not read the ins and outs of the apple deal before commenting on it??

Im fed up of hearing people say "u2 gave it away for free" they bloody didnt,they sold it for 100 million dollers. What act wouldnt do that???

Ozzy would jump at the chance to have a deal like that. Remember this is the same family that let cameras be put up in their home for alot of money to be on tv.

Complete prats!!!?

I am hesitant to go after U2 critics around here, just because it often makes you appear like nothing more than a butthurt sycophant. But really, Sharon is deplorable. As his manager, Sharon has (and Ozzy deserves shit too, because he's so oblivious) fucked over people left and right for years.

I'm not talking about fucking over industry hacks (because who would care?), I am talking fucking over musicians. Among other examples, Jake E. Lee wrote Bark at the Moon and has never been credited for it, much less ever paid a dime for it. That's the kind of shit Sharon Osbourne does.

Rest assured, nobody with a clue respects their opinions.
 
if memory serves, that neighborhood has a high hipster quotient. bring cheap box wine to spray at them if they start to surround you. it burns their skin.

Pfft. I've lived in Ballard for 10 years now. The hipster haters can come the fuck at me.
 
Ozzy Osbourne: U2's Apple Album Was "Fucking Selfish" | Gizmodo UK

Ozzy's at it now ?

Are the Osbournes that thick and stupid??? Do they not read the ins and outs of the apple deal before commenting on it??

Im fed up of hearing people say "u2 gave it away for free" they bloody didnt,they sold it for 100 million dollers. What act wouldnt do that???

Ozzy would jump at the chance to have a deal like that. Remember this is the same family that let cameras be put up in their home for alot of money to be on tv.

Complete prats!!!?
Are the Osbournes that thick and stupid???





Yes
 
Got a link or a scan? Also, don't know if I'd call The Sun a "news"paper.


For some reason i cant post pictures on this forum. Its a 3 page spread though. Well worth getting.

Yeah its more of a beano then a newspaper.?
 
Not sure if this has been posted yet, but I stumbles upon a review of the CD in "Ultimate Guitar" (which I've confessed to never have looked at before now) that's a fairly mixed-to-negative review, and it's unremarkable from the other mixed-to-netavie reviews, except that, despite liking the record, I couldn't find much to disagree with in the conclusion, and I think the last line is particularly true.

Overall Impression: Despite their impressive longevity and discography size, U2 is arguably not the face of rock and roll, and there are plenty of other high-profile bands that are more ubiquitous than U2 today. And as U2's music has been predictably static for the past decade - neither soaring to great heights nor sinking to dismal lows - "Songs of Innocence" would have simply come and gone in the natural flow of new music releases, had it not been for its pompous release. Musically, "Songs of Innocence" is just average, but its music didn't need to capture the zeitgeist; the larger-than-life marketing strategy it utilized already took care of that.And consequently, "Songs of Innocence" will be remembered by all of the stories about its marketing buzz, and not about the compositions it contained.
 
IF SOI is what is considered average music these days then we are living in the golden age. Some people remember the Beatles white album because it was white. Others remember the music. It is possible to remember both. And SOI can be remembered for both the way it was released and the beautiful songs it contains. It's not either/or. And the music will either last or it will not. Marketing however will change skins a zillion times so what is being talked about today will not be talked about as soon as there is a new way.
 
I've really grown tired (and slightly desperate) of the agenda that many "reviewers" have against U2 these days. From many of these so-called reviews it's quite clear to see that they didn't bother really listening to the album, but had their opinion of it (and U2 in general) made up before listening. I decided to stick to the music magazines and reviewers that really care about music, while many others simply care about bringing the band down and being miserable. It's like they think it would cause them a fair amount of pain to simply NOT bash U2. It's become so mainstream.
 


Very nice...not a professional, objective review but how many have been with this album? This is at the opposite end of the spectrum to the vitriolic and snide reviews we've been reading since Sept. 9th and refreshing and inspiring to read. You almost feel, "yes, there are people out there who feel the same as me".


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 

Great find Super_Yo :applaud: Thank you very much
One of the most thoughtful and indepth reviews of this new record and
also a great story of how it all began back in 1982.

I am not a very religious person, I´ve never been, but when I first heard
them back in 82, I too heard something in this band that was totally
diferent from other bands at that time.
This U2 band was in touch with something else - not of this world.

In a strange and beautiful way they were speaking with angels and
their songs were speaking to me through their music the melodies in the songs.
This was not only spiritual-like music , it was also great rock-n-roll music
to lift up your soul from the sadness.
I looked at the world in a diferent way, after I first heard U2.

Since that day I have not heard many bands who can create music or
create the same feeling, that makes a person feel this way.
U2 is a very unique band. :rockon:
 
Last edited:
Great find Super_Yo :applaud: Thank you very much
One of the most thoughtful and indepth reviews of this new record and
also a great story of how it all began back in 1982.

I am not a very religious person, I´ve never been, but when I first heard
them back in 82, I too heard something in this band that was totally
diferent from other bands at that time.
This U2 band was in touch with something else - not of this world.

In a strange and beautiful way they were speaking with angels and
their songs were speaking to me through their music the melodies in the songs.
This was not only spiritual-like music , it was also great rock-n-roll music
to lift up your soul from the sadness.
I looked at the world in a diferent way, after I first heard U2.

Since that day I have not heard many bands who can create music or
create the same feeling, that makes a person feel this way.
U2 is a very unique band. :rockon:

Tears of weight and joy. Thank you for sharing that. There is one other band that gives me glimpses of what U2 does, but just glimpses. I still appreciate that band for what they are, though. After all, who could ever be another U2?

There hasn't been nor will there likely ever be another band such as U2. A crack in the cosmos was made and we have them. I doubt it can ever be opened in such a way again. Wouldn't it be wonderful if it was, though! :heart:
 
I like that she referenced Gloria. Gloria was when I realized this band is difficult and different but so rewarding to listen to.
 
IF SOI is what is considered average music these days then we are living in the golden age.

Indeed we are.

More great albums coming out annually than ever before? Check. (And by great, I mean great, not necessarily more things on the level of Sgt. Pepper than ever).

Decidedly average U2 album? Check.
 

That's a very eloquent take-down of U2 and Bono. The author understands Zoo TV very well, but I disagree with his analysis of Songs of Innocence. Bono isn't saying he's still on Cedarwood Road, but that his past informs his present. He also seems to think that Raised By Wolves is about Bono, but it's not. Bono's not placing himself at the centre of an event, he's singing about the event. In the liner notes and interviews he mentions how had he not altered his routine he'd have been blown up. Which would make an impression on anyone, and it's providing context for the song. It would also be fitting of such an intelligent author to know that the money apple paid went to Universal, not U2. It went towards U2's debt.
 
Back
Top Bottom