New Album Discussion: Worthwhile, Informative, And Not Even Slightly Grating

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
The Panther said:
I think the point was that Springsteen fans are happy, not that U2 fans like Springsteen's music.
Click to expand...

What I'm trying to say is that I'm happy as a U2 fan because I think they've made some great music lately.
 
Registered Dude said:
Springsteen released one album between 1993 and 2001.
Click to expand...

U2 will only release one album between 2004 - 2013, and it wasn't very successful, although pretty good. Hate to say it, but the last album was no more than a platform from which to launch the biggest tour of all time.
 
The_acrobat said:
Hate to say it, but the last album was no more than a platform from which to launch the biggest tour of all time.
Click to expand...

that's easy to say after the fact. the next album then should consist of some fantastic indie tunes to lay the platform to launch the smallest gig tour of all time. tickets will go for $12000 a seat in the 300 seat capacity venues.
 
Quantity doesn't equal quality for me. So I'm happy with what we got right now. If I had to choose between three ATYCLBs or Bombs, or one NLOTH? Yeah. I'd go with NLOTH.
 
The_acrobat said:
U2 will only release one album between 2004 - 2013, and it wasn't very successful, although pretty good. Hate to say it, but the last album was no more than a platform from which to launch the biggest tour of all time.
Click to expand...

well no, between 2004 and now we've had two albums. gotta make it 2005.
 
The_acrobat said:
Hate to say it, but the last album was no more than a platform from which to launch the biggest tour of all time.
Click to expand...
Indeed, that's why they spent years making it, scrapped sessions with a producer, delayed the release date...
 
popacrobat said:
well no, between 2004 and now we've had two albums. gotta make it 2005.
Click to expand...

Yeah true.

And okay, I retract my statement about NLOTH. The band CLEARLY tried to make a great album, and they *almost* succeeded. My criticism of the whole era was that the 360 tour had NOTHING to do with NLOTH the album. Even Vertigo seemed somewhat symbiotic with HTDAAB album, at least in it's first year. Really, the Vertigo tour would have been better suited with the Claw and the 360 stadium setup.

NLOTH called for a little more intimate of a setting. I wish U2 would've stuck with their original concept for the album (Morocco Sessions), and decorated the stage like their Moroccan studio was, with the rugs on the floor, etc. Start with a few *hits*, then play the NLOTH album as a whole, and then finish with another run of *hits*. This would've been a ballsy move that many would've respected, I think.
 
The Panther said:
Does anyone wonder what it would be like to be on a Bruce Springsteen forum? They guy is 10-11 years older than U2, but has put out 174 albums in the past 5 years (a new one is confirmed for 2012). In other words, his fans online actually regularly have new music to talk about... unlike U2 fans, who've been given 32 LP tracks in the past 14 years.
Click to expand...

I've thought for a long time that the Springsteen analogy is a good one. He had a fairly bad creative slump when in his forties (i.e. the 1990s), made a very good album (2001's The Rising) that didn't pander to any audience but connected just the same with a massive audience because of its subject content (9/11) but also because it sounded like a record made by someone not afraid to try out new-ish sounds, without contorting himself to work with whatever super-hot producer was rolling out the radio hits at the time (if it had been a couple of years earlier, that would've meant being remixed by Fatboy Slim).

In that sense 'being relevant' will be a very important part of U2's future success. Not, as Bono seems to think, by contorting themselves
But by making a record that sounds like it was made by men who are 50 but still have something important to say, something that will connect with a bigger audience.

Back to Springsteen again: I listened to his Born in the USA album at the weekend for the first time in ages and a couple of things struck me. The first is that the album was absolutely stacked with single material that would sound great coming out of what Bono calls 'small speakers'. But that's not the reason why it's such a huge record - it's successful simply because it still speaks to universal emotions and experiences. It doesn't matter if it's the 80s, or if Springsteen had made this record when he was 30 or 50, lyrics like 'Come back home to the refinery / Hiring man says "Son, if it was up to me"' or 'I had a job, I had a girl / I had something going mister in this world / I got laid off down at the lumber yard / Our love went bad, times got hard / Now I work down at the carwash / Where all it ever does is rain' still have a hefty resonance.

So that's what I'd like from U2. They don't owe anybody anything - they've given enough already. I can completely understand the desire to stay on top, and the desperation that could set in if you feel like you're on the slide. But I'm sure Springsteen felt like that too in the 1990s - it was only by being 'relevant' - not in sound, but in theme - that he re-captured his 'glory days' (sorry for the terrible play on words - couldn't help it!). U2 should loosen up, let themselves go, and I'm sure it'll come. (For evidence, see what I feel is their best work of the last decade, and the stuff that sounds truest to themselves: 'Moment of Surrender', 'Unknown Caller', 'Cedars of Lebanon', 'Stuck in a Moment', 'Window in the Skies' - all cracking songs and all 'relevant' and fresh-sounding, if nothing at all like what was in the charts at the time.)
 
The_acrobat said:
NLOTH called for a little more intimate of a setting. I wish U2 would've stuck with their original concept for the album (Morocco Sessions), and decorated the stage like their Moroccan studio was, with the rugs on the floor, etc. Start with a few *hits*, then play the NLOTH album as a whole, and then finish with another run of *hits*. This would've been a ballsy move that many would've respected, I think.
Click to expand...

While I can appreciate the sentiment in this, and the idea might be interesting for a hardcore, this would be live performance suicide. As much as I really like NLOTH, the idea of sitting through the entire record played live just doesn't appeal. There's too much slow stuff there for it to be anything other than a drag.
 
The Panther said:
No, that was Mighty Mouse. He's going to fly in a giant neon strawberry to re-invoke the band's muse from Pop but with a different flavor.

Does anyone wonder what it would be like to be on a Bruce Springsteen forum? They guy is 10-11 years older than U2, but has put out 174 albums in the past 5 years (a new one is confirmed for 2012). In other words, his fans online actually regularly have new music to talk about... unlike U2 fans, who've been given 32 LP tracks in the past 14 years.
Click to expand...

Just imagine how much more fun the setlist parties would be
 
Registered Dude said:
Springsteen released one album between 1993 and 2001.
Click to expand...

One studio album, yes... but during that time he also released two live albums, the later featuring new music (and an HBO special), a greatest hits album featuring new music, two hit singles from movie soundtracks, and a massive dump of b sides, unreleased songs and demos with Tracks.
 
U2place.com forum member met McGuiness in Dublin, and she asked him if U2 is in the studio. He said they will not record until next year.
 
the plan all along to the best of my knowledge was that they were going to get together a bit toward the end of 2011, but not really start getting into gear until early 2012.

seems like they're following that. I wouldn't expect any news of actual substance until March or April.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom