How to deal with new album expectations

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
This thread is hilarious.
You can like any album you want because music is subjective. However, it should be clear to everyone that the band isn't up to the standard they were from 1984-1995. Musically and lyrically they aren't there anymore.
...in your opinion.
That's not what I said. I have subjective tastes but when I and most people look at the band objectively they'll reach the same conclusion as I have.
No. When people share your opinion they'll reach the same conclusion as you have.
That's the problem with the musical parts of the forum. People need to be more objective.
Read: More people need to share my opinion.
You aren't understanding me. When you are objective and make an analysis it isn't an opinion it is a factual conclusion. The difference is that it can be proven to another person with an objective mindset.
You can't make a factual conclusion on whether an album/band/era is good or not. It's all opinion. It can't be proven to another person with an objective mindset.
It isn't the sound of the band anymore. I'll give you Velvet Dress but not the others. They have gone away from their thing. The problem is you are still being subjective. Objectively you can see a complete shift from them being "them".
Again, that's your opinion. Not fact.
Have you heard a word I've said? It isn't my opinion. It is a factual observation based on objectivity. It is them because that is who they are. That is their mark.
...in your opinion.
Calm down. I'm not trying to guilt anyone. I was just stating a fact for Sicy.
Based on objectivity, or was that your opinion. I'm confused.

:down:
 
oh wow....this thread really exploded....I agree with Mr. V....Screwtape...pretty much everything you've said is based on your opinion.....it's all subjectivity, and you're trying to somehow construe your thoughts into an objective conclusion, when your points simply cannot be proven....:shrug:
 
People should just listen to the new album and if they think its great that is awesome, if they dont like it that is their own choice. People are not robots or computers, they arent going to react exactly the same way as somebody else. Everything in the world to some extent is based on opinion, but something such as music which is all based on perspective is even more so.

U2 have been around longer then a lot of people on this board have been alive, and been very sucessful finacially and artistically even in their "failures". One thing I will say is this, if U2 thinks this is their best album they should probably call it a career because in the end I feel the band are the ones that need to be impressed and not necessarly the fans of the band.

It will be a sad day when U2 calls it quits but I would much rather them be happy with their last album then feel it was left unfinished.
 
U2 have been around longer then a lot of people on this board have been alive, and been very sucessful finacially and artistically even in their "failures". One thing I will say is this, if U2 thinks this is their best album they should probably call it a career because in the end I feel the band are the ones that need to be impressed and not necessarly the fans of the band.

:huh:

what? U2 are never going to release an album they aren't satisfied, or "impressed," by....the fact that they are excited about the new material isn't really a surprise, it's natural...but the fact that others like Lillywhite are calling it their best, and Eno is making comments like "best song ever recorded with U2" and Lanois is saying stuff like "Bono's singing like a bird" or "this is one of U2's great innovative records" is what is surprising....U2 will be most likely to call it quits when they release an album that they feel is worthy enough to put out, but the reaction to the album is far less than they expected, and the fans in general aren't impressed or satisfied.
 
They clearly believe Pop wasn't finished, and I know they weren't satisfied with Staring at the Sun or Whos Gonna Ride Your Wild Horses- they wanted more time to work on those songs because they thought they could have been so much more.
 
U2 doesnt have anything to prove to the fans, they only have something to prove to themselves, and if this is the album theyve always wanted to make and feel they cant do any better, they should call it quits.
 
U2 doesnt have anything to prove to the fans, they only have something to prove to themselves, and if this is the album theyve always wanted to make and feel they cant do any better, they should call it quits.

dude....

ok, read the part I've highlighted...that makes no sense!! :confused:

I think it's pretty safe to say this album will be better than the previous two, and could possibly be something very special, maybe right up there with their finest work :)
 
Well, I guess I'll attempt to steer this thread back on to course.

How to deal with new album expectations?

The answer: I don't. Simple as that. I pay no attention to what anyone says about the new album and just listen to it and take it all in. I keep an open mind and a shut mouth. Works every time.
 
I try to avoid listening to U2 before any release of new material. They aren't the same band they used to be and they are way past their prime so hearing older stuff would create impossible expectations.

And thank God they aren't that band any more. Stuff from the 80's was perfect for the time - but if U2 sounded like that now, I wouldn't be a fan.

As for "way past their prime", I guess this depends on what your "prime" date was. "Boy"? "War"?? JT? AB? "Pop"? ATYCLB? As I don't consider JT their prime by any means, and there's also a lot of fluff on AB, I feel U2 have never really had a prime. Each album has garbage I abhor. So for me, U2's prime never occurred - at least creatively speaking.
 
aww, I missed the entire "discussion" about objectivity

I can only think of 2 ways to objectively look at music (and surprisingly enough whether or not U2 have an 'etheral' quality has little to do with it)

funny enough both these ways would lead me to an entire different conclusion

1. album sales and winning awards
I think this would probably be the most distasteful way to judge an album
but it is completely objective
most people thought the album was worth buying and most 'critics' thought the album was a quality one
by this objective criteria U2 would be on top of their game right now

2. structurally the best worked out songs
(so we're not talking about inspired, innovative and whatever)
already less obvious and therefore more debatable than option #1 but still this can be judged rather objectively
while How to dismantle ... doesn't particularly rate high on my personal favourite U2 albums list I guess that when you objectively look at the songs they probably are the best set of songs the band has released


umm, so yeah :up:

I still don't see why anyone would have to deal with album expectations
if it bothers you I'd advise you just not to visit U2 forums
until the single hits the radio you probably will hear near to nothing about it all
 
Back
Top Bottom