hanksta13
The Fly
I have teenage kids and they love U2, but thats because they have been exposed to them by me. All their friends think U2 suck because their parents only listened to 80's hair bands.
Just a rant
- Thread starter blue screen
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
I have teenage kids and they love U2, but thats because they have been exposed to them by me. All their friends think U2 suck because their parents only listened to 80's hair bands.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Nope. Their nickname is 'Friday'.
What promotion would be bigger than "U2 to release new album with all new model of distribution"? It would be the lead story at RS...and CNN, and GMA, and every single media outlet there is.
I don't want them to not make money. I love it when U2 is the biggest band in the world, and outsells the rest of the (mostly) crap top 40. I love hearing the "casual" music listening audience talking about my favorite band. My entire point has been: the traditional way of accomplishing that feat is just that--tradition. The world has changed; technology has changed. There are other methods to promote and distribute an album than those methods developed 50 years ago because of the technological limitations of the time. And I'd like to see U2 out in front of that wave of change, rather than settled right in the back with the rest of the luddites.
Two weeks ago I was pissy because I wanted to hear the album and it wasn't leaking. I can deal--GOYB and NLOTH2 are on constant repeat for me, and in 8 days at the latest it'll be out in Japan and I can get my "early release digital back-up" copy.
Extensive sitting around and thinking about it has me frustrated about the theory, and the underlying assumptions about why this delay is "necessary". It isn't necessary; it's just traditional. And I'm not a fan of tradition for the sake of tradition, especially from people (U2) that I respect and care about.
On a side note, I wonder why folks think I'm a she? It has been a while since my last haircut, but...
I don't want them to not make money. I love it when U2 is the biggest band in the world, and outsells the rest of the (mostly) crap top 40. I love hearing the "casual" music listening audience talking about my favorite band. My entire point has been: the traditional way of accomplishing that feat is just that--tradition. The world has changed; technology has changed. There are other methods to promote and distribute an album than those methods developed 50 years ago because of the technological limitations of the time. And I'd like to see U2 out in front of that wave of change, rather than settled right in the back with the rest of the luddites.
Two weeks ago I was pissy because I wanted to hear the album and it wasn't leaking. I can deal--GOYB and NLOTH2 are on constant repeat for me, and in 8 days at the latest it'll be out in Japan and I can get my "early release digital back-up" copy.
Extensive sitting around and thinking about it has me frustrated about the theory, and the underlying assumptions about why this delay is "necessary". It isn't necessary; it's just traditional. And I'm not a fan of tradition for the sake of tradition, especially from people (U2) that I respect and care about.
On a side note, I wonder why folks think I'm a she? It has been a while since my last haircut, but...
doctorwho
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
Every artist is different.
Some can whip through a painting in a few hours and, once it dries, have it ready to frame and sell.
Other artists spend weeks or months on a painting, getting it just right. Some even scrap their original work and start over.
The same is true with music, and I think we all know by now that U2 definitely follows the second pattern, in that they are willing to scrap (or put aside) prior work if they do not feel it is right.
And can one blame them? Sometimes some work just isn't that good.
For years, U2 fans hollered for the "Red Hill Mining Town" video. U2 didn't release it as they didn't release that song as a single, as was their original intention. But also, they never liked that video. Still, word got out to fans that such a video existed and fans wanted to see it.
20 years after JT was released, U2 gave fans the video they longed to see.
What was the reaction?
I recall tons of people here writing how much they disliked it. Oh sure, some loved how "hot" one or more of the band members looked (hi PLEBA!
), but even those people weren't impressed with the video.And I bet U2 could have said a big ol', "Told ya it was bad!"
U2 are picky and that's their choice. Reznor may be able to whip out something and treat fans. U2 doesn't do that, but they frequently have little concerts (where one or all members perform) that are often available on the web shortly thereafter. So what we may lack in studio recordings, we get in live performances.
U2 or U2 members also do lots of little things between albums, like working on movie soundtracks or appearing as guest artists. Between 1993's "Zooropa" and 1997's "Pop", I once counted over 30 odd projects that U2 members did! These projects are just like Reznor whipping out a single in an afternoon.
If there's a point to all of this, I guess it's to say that we all know by now that U2 won't release something unless they are happy with it (even if some fans question it). But they do lots of live projects and smaller studio projects that make up for their slower pace.
Granted, it is annoying to wait 3 to 4.5 years between albums (as we've done now for a while - even TUF to JT and R&H to AB were 3 years), and other artists, like REM, have commented that U2's slower pace is odd (but that it works for them), U2 do produce enough mini-concerts and other smaller studio items that should keep us happy. I've discovered lots of U2 tidbits during this "down time".
Plus, as great as it was for Reznor to whip out that single, the bigger question is - was it REALLY any good?
People seem to be missing my point:
- That big hollywood blockbuster that comes out on July 4th? Do you think it's finished on May 4th and then just sits in a can for 2 months? No, they're working on it right up to the last minute. Same with video games, and most other forms of entertainment these days. Only TV (which has a set distribution schedule), books (which are dying as a business enterprise precisely because they cling to the old ways) and some musical acts are stuck pre-1995.
- Yes, there are a whole bunch of things that the band/machine can be doing now...none of which involves working on the actual album or is preventing it from being released. Art? The NLOTH cover was released Jan 15th. Rehearsals? Has to wait until the album is done anyway. Tour prep? Willie's been quoted as having been working on the plans since last spring, all the way through early recording (a typical U2 practice back as far as ZooTV). Promotion? Do you really think anything has happened in the last week--or will in the next week--that would reach a broader audience than the story "U2 says f-it, album is done, it's up on iTunes tonight at midnight"? They aren't just going to drop it off in the bargain bin at Sam's Club and not tell anyone...it would be the biggest story in all media--consumer and straight news, not just music media--if it happened.
This entire process is filled with things that are traditionally done in the gap between album completion and physical distribution. Because, decades ago, the technology of that process mandated that there was a gap there. But the technology has changed. And following the same traditions now is as senseless as waiting until tomorrow morning's newspaper to find out what the weather was like today, because it's traditional to get your news from the physical newspaper.
And this is a rant thread...I'm not generally this cranky.
I don't think we missed your point... I think it was pretty much covered in the first couple pages of this thread. We all understand that your beef is with the way Universal is 'behind the times' in their business practices. It's a fair point to make, but I still don't see why you and a few others are in such a tiff over it. If that's the way they want to run their business, so be it. Like I said before, I'm sure they have their reasons.
I must say, this thread has taken a bit of a turn that's made for a very interesting read.
coolian2
Blue Crack Supplier
the fact that there hasn't been a leak is encouraging. it shows the band aren't being as dimwitted as they've been in the past.
plus with new technology, it is less likely to leak.
i hate this feeling of entitlement some fans have. awww, i deserve the album because i've been a fan since they were the hype. fuck you, get in line. you've waited four years, you can't wait seven more days, when it gets released in japan?
(nb, that wasn't a personal attack, that was a general statement)
plus with new technology, it is less likely to leak.
i hate this feeling of entitlement some fans have. awww, i deserve the album because i've been a fan since they were the hype. fuck you, get in line. you've waited four years, you can't wait seven more days, when it gets released in japan?
(nb, that wasn't a personal attack, that was a general statement)
you have no source.
Again, I blame my mom. She used to work on mainframe computers in the 70's, and these days doesn't know the mouse has a 2nd button, and really believes she's the 1000th visitor to a site and has won a special prize if she just clicks here...
12 hours of that. Enough to drive the luddite hatred in even the most mild-mannered U2 fan...
12 hours of that. Enough to drive the luddite hatred in even the most mild-mannered U2 fan...
incorrect. the source is in the picture i posted.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Then you should call them on the phone they are holding and tell them they were wrong
yes. the bottle of dasani.
look... even if you know a dude who knows a dude, that's still not a source.
i know a dude who knows a dude, too. even met the dude who's known by the first dude. heck, have even gotten some "inside info" from time to time via the dude via the dude, and gotten some other primo perks via dude on dude (pause).
i certainly don't claim to have a "source," for if i were to run into the second dude out on the street without the first dude being with me, the second dude wouldn't remember me unless i reminded him of the first dude.
your info has already been proven false. if you provide some info that nobody's heard before, is not something that can be picked off of already released rumors... well then, now maybe somebody will believe you that you have a "source." but when one of your big "scoops" was proven false? yea... not good for you.
So true.
PowerSurge
New Yorker
...or it can be someone who is made up for the point of making a prediction or claim sound valid.
just saying.
blue screen
The Fly
I've been on the brink of writing something similar for a few days now...bravo to you for clearing the path a bit.
It's not so much that U2 remains tied to a record company that bothers me, it's how freaking outdated the overall model is. Way back in the day, it took significant time to physically take the master tapes from the studio to the manufacturing plant, press the vinyl, package it all up, and send it out to stores...all done with no computers, no internet, no fax machines, and a phone system that still required a bit of thought to use. And so record companies, knowing the timeline, built their promotional plans around it to take advantage of it. A single pressed early and given to radio stations--the only way that anyone heard new music, or music news, back then--with suitable hype building while the damn discs were being made and shipped.
But that's not the world we live in anymore.
Things that don't bug me about the process:
- The band wanting to make some money
- The label wanting to make some money
- How cool an actual CD is, especially the deluxe version that I've already pre-ordered
- Properly promoting the album prior to its release so it sells big and everyone loves U2
Things that do bug me:
- The album is done. Like, right now. It's finished. And the distribution system exists that, if U2/Universal wanted to, we could all be listening to the album within 1 hour from this very second. Millions of people could be listening to the finished product right freaking now if the label (and, by their silence and unwillingness to push for a change in the process, U2) weren't tied to a model of distribution that's over half a century old. The current model of promotion and distribution was created when "Duck and cover" was a leading meme.
I don't want the album to "leak" because I don't want to pay for it; it's already pre-ordered ($80US), I'll buy all the singles ($40-ish US), and see them multiple times on tour ($waytoofuckingmuchbutworthit-ish).
I don't want the album to "leak" because I'm a kid who likes free stuff and sticking it to the man/RIAA/etc.
I don't actually want the album to "leak" at all, really...I just want to listen to it. I want my favorite--supposedly progressive/technologically-minded--band to pay at least a little attention to how the world works now, how it will be working in the next 5-10 years, and try to get a bit ahead of the curve.
I don't want my favorite band to act like they have the same level of technological understanding as my freaking grandmother.
I wouldn't expect this sort of thinking from a label...I just was expecting U2 to be pushing a bit more, and not acting like just another 4-piece ho in the label's pimphouse, willing to go along with whatever the boss says.
Though, Sebastian's been in charge of u2.com since the beginning, on their call, so it's not like I don't know that all their "new media" talk has been 90% hot air from the start, but it's never been so front and center for me like it is now.
Thanks, I think you've said it better than me.
It's not the money side of it, because the money really isn't in sales anymore it's in the tour gross and merchandising. Even if they sell 10 mill copies worldwide and have a great deal with Universal, let's say $2 per sale, that's 20 million, something they could make in a month's worth of shows.
That's not the issue for me, it's just the fact that everything is changing fast, and to be the biggest band in the world and still use a marketing and distribution model that is way outdated, just doesn't seem right for a band who is still wanting to stay ahead of the curve musically.
In fact, in Flannagan's (sic?) book, they talk about how they know the delivery of media is going to change and how to be prepared for it..this was before Napster, and yet they still cling to this model.
Maybe it is just how big they are that binds them to this model, although I would think it would somehow free them up to do whatever they wanted, or at least try...I mean if the album has been ready for over a month, why aren't we allowed to buy it and hear it immediately?
This is NOT something that alienates me from my love for the band and its music. I am, have been and always will be a huge fan of their work, whether it lives up to expectations or not, I'll always root for them artistically. Their shows are second to none, and I'm very proud to be a U2 fan.
This was just a thought, something that has been lingering in my head for some time, especially seeing what Radiohead has done, and NO I'm not saying Radiohead is better, or think they are bigger than they truly are.
But how cool would it have been to be up Dec 31 and have U2 stream a live rendition of their new album?
BY no means am I bashing the band, and the thread started a little shaky but it was very interesting to read your opinions on the matter.
Again, thanks for indulging this whim.
coolian2
Blue Crack Supplier
if this current leak is for real, at least i only look like a partial dick, not a complete dick.
LemonMelon
More 5G Than Man
This thread = pwned.
Similar threads
