More SOE Reviews - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Your Blue Room > Everything You Know Is Wrong > Where The Album Has A Name - Songs of Experience
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 12-04-2017, 01:37 AM   #1
The Fly
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 38
Local Time: 12:24 AM
More SOE Reviews

Well, here's the Pitchfork review, it got a 5.3, so they finally broke 5 (since HTDAAB).

A little surprised as I thought they might still honor them with a 4.3 or something, ah well, an improvement nonetheless.

https://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums...of-experience/

It doesn't seem like the critic is aware of the backstory of the album, particularly Bono's health scare , which I think enhances the album a bit more, but to each their own.
__________________

__________________
dk42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2017, 01:48 AM   #2
War Child
 
gweeps's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Kingston ON, Canada
Posts: 717
Local Time: 12:24 AM
Why does everybody insist SOE is their 14th album? Rattle & Hum is a soundtrack album with both studio and live songs, and Original Soundtracks 1 is not credited as a U2 release, so technically you couldn't count that one either.

Boy
October
War
The Unforgettable Fire
The Joshua Tree
Achtung Baby
Zooropa
Pop
All That You Can't Leave Behind
How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb
No Line on the Horizon
Songs of Innocence
Songs of Experience

[/RANT]

On topic, of course Pitchfork isn't going to give U2 a good review because they don't make music that is tailored to Pitchfork readers' interests. (Yes I'm that cynical.)
__________________

__________________
gweeps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2017, 02:01 AM   #3
War Child
 
silkensky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Pasadena, California
Posts: 524
Local Time: 05:24 AM
More SOE Reviews

Huh? Of course Rattle and Hum is considered an official U2 album, with even a tour (Lovetown) to support it!
__________________
silkensky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2017, 02:31 AM   #4
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Catman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Baton Rouge, Louisiana
Posts: 3,486
Local Time: 11:24 PM
I wonder why that author for Pitchfork even gave it a 5.3 lol; can't think of a single song the guy mentioned as being particularly noteworthy (not even a mention of Little Things. wtf), and his wrap-up is a depressing conclusion that SoE's subpar, disappointing quality is as "good" as U2 is going to get. I mean, I'm all for respecting opinions (particularly when it comes to music)--I'm just genuinely curious what made him score the album as "high" as he did lol
__________________
Catman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2017, 02:32 AM   #5
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,598
Local Time: 10:24 PM
https://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums...of-experience/

Blah, blah, blah, U2 is old.

It's pretty clear that U2's Songs of Ascent will have to be so good that reviewers feel like they snorted cocaine to get above 7.9 on Pitchfork.
__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2017, 02:58 AM   #6
ONE
love, blood, life
 
dan_smee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Canberra, Australia
Posts: 12,850
Local Time: 04:24 PM
Death, taxes, a poor review for U2 from pitchfork, and Interference members whinging about it. These things I know to be certain.
__________________
dan_smee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2017, 03:19 AM   #7
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 3,225
Local Time: 05:24 AM
Isn't 5.3 good for u2 from pitchfork?? I was expecting a lot less
__________________
rennowba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2017, 03:24 AM   #8
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,598
Local Time: 10:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by rennowba View Post
Isn't 5.3 good for u2 from pitchfork?? I was expecting a lot less
They've trained us to expects less.
__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2017, 03:53 AM   #9
Acrobat
 
Montrose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Montreal
Posts: 465
Local Time: 12:24 AM
He started off getting the whole point of the Def Leppard listening experience wrong. From what I remember, it wasn't the quality of the music on that tape, it was the fullness and loudness of the sound. An audio quality sort of thing, where Hysteria's mastering and sound quality really made that tape explode on the car speakers compared to U2's old stuff. It wasn't the galvanizing force that led the band to Achtung..except that the reviewer wanted to fit some examples into his theme, so he made it about that. Then pitchfork crashed my browser and I was spared the rest. Lemme guess - another review where Pitchfork finds someone to review U2 the band , barely touching on the music, with a sigh and some muttering about the usual?
__________________
Montrose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2017, 03:59 AM   #10
Refugee
 
kiwilad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Malmsbury Villa
Posts: 1,422
Local Time: 06:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dan_smee View Post
Death, taxes, a poor review for U2 from pitchfork, and Interference members whinging about it. These things I know to be certain.
U2 making terrible singles choices. (You forgot to include it on your list)
__________________
kiwilad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2017, 04:05 AM   #11
ONE
love, blood, life
 
dan_smee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Canberra, Australia
Posts: 12,850
Local Time: 04:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwilad View Post
U2 making terrible singles choices. (You forgot to include it on your list)
Ah, fuckit.
__________________
dan_smee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2017, 04:23 AM   #12
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Mack_Again's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: definitely Osaka
Posts: 6,630
Local Time: 12:24 AM
actually for Pitchfork, they've managed not to just irrationally trash the album.
__________________
Mack_Again is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2017, 04:25 AM   #13
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Mack_Again's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: definitely Osaka
Posts: 6,630
Local Time: 12:24 AM
but i think that their desire to be relevant isn't really turning out that well on SOE.
__________________
Mack_Again is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2017, 04:42 AM   #14
The Fly
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 109
Local Time: 05:24 AM
I do feel like the reviewer has misinterpreted a few things there. I’ve also noticed a trend in reviews of the album that they assume I/me in the songs means Bono and I’m not sure that is always the case. It’s undoubtedly a personal album but I think there are characters in there too (particularly Red Flag Day).

I think we would all agree though that U2’s best recent music is the stuff that isn’t trying to be hits/relevant. I find American Soul pretty embarrassing but would love non fans to hear the opening two tracks of SoE.
__________________
onemoresolo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2017, 06:01 AM   #15
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 3,225
Local Time: 05:24 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mack_Again View Post
but i think that their desire to be relevant isn't really turning out that well on SOE.


I honestly don't think u2 will be that relevant band again no matter what they release. There's still a big interest in new music, more then anyone of an act their age, so they should be very happy about that
__________________

__________________
rennowba is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:24 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com