on Danger Mouse's production

[lazarus]

The argument is over whether or not POP's sound was some calculated move to draw in more listeners.

That electronica was mainstream when U2 were recording it is a separate argument, and also wrong.

I'm aware the band has always wanted to be huge. But the music they made was usually out of step with the mainstream (TUF, JT) or ahead of it (AB, Zooropa). The giant audiences came to what they were doing, not vice-versa. So your statement that they've always been mainstream doesn't tell the whole story as it's usually been on their terms.

With POP, they were transitioning from their current electronic direction into rising club trends much in the way Madonna does--before they become ubiquitous and overdone. But the delay of the album affected the perception of what they were trying to do.

As for Bono's public proclamations, let's not forget he's the guy who said "Fuck the pop kids, we don't need 'em". And promising to "fuck up the mainstream" isn't exactly saying "Hooray for the mainstream!"

And again, the problem many had with ATYCLB was that it came off as a retreat to safer, proven sounds, with more direct songs. That doesn't automatically make it bad, but the idea that the album was a bold, brave move (U2girl continues to insist it was moreso than POP) is a complete joke.

 

[The Slow Loris]

The argument is over whether or not POP's sound was some calculated move to draw in more listeners.

That electronica was mainstream when U2 were recording it is a separate argument, and also wrong.

I'm aware the band has always wanted to be huge. But the music they made was usually out of step with the mainstream (TUF, JT) or ahead of it (AB, Zooropa). The giant audiences came to what they were doing, not vice-versa. So your statement that they've always been mainstream doesn't tell the whole story as it's usually been on their terms.

With POP, they were transitioning from their current electronic direction into rising club trends much in the way Madonna does--before they become ubiquitous and overdone. But the delay of the album affected the perception of what they were trying to do.

As for Bono's public proclamations, let's not forget he's the guy who said "Fuck the pop kids, we don't need 'em". And promising to "fuck up the mainstream" isn't exactly saying "Hooray for the mainstream!"

And again, the problem many had with ATYCLB was that it came off as a retreat to safer, proven sounds, with more direct songs. That doesn't automatically make it bad, but the idea that the album was a bold, brave move (U2girl continues to insist it was moreso than POP) is a complete joke.

I again agree with most of what you're saying, though let's be honest - Achtung Baby was probably their most "poppy" album ever up until that point, even moreso than The Joshua Tree. With songs like 'Mysterious Ways' and 'Real Thing' and 'Wild Horses', it was a pop-lover's dream. Yes it incorporated some new sounds and rhythms (for U2), and was one of their most creative albums ever, but it was certainly one of their most overtly mainstream sounding albums, too. Every song has some huge hooks. Every song has a great melody you can sing to; even the startling 'Zoo Station' and the shocking 'The Fly' has big choruses. 'Zooropa' was far more experimental, and was the only real "U2 album" (OS1 was not classified as a proper U2 record) that deserved a grammy for "best alternative album" IMO. That was a truly experimental U2 album. I totally agree with Flood in his recent interview in which he says that was U2 at its most un-selfconscious on Zooropa. Still a great pop album, though - a sensibility that U2 almost totally lost on, ironically, the Pop album. As Bono once said, "You hold onto something so tightly, you've already lost it." They put a lot of work into that album -- and believe me, they wanted that album to be huge as well. They forgot about their sensibilities, however, and focussed more on the shine. Which is ok. But, because of this, it's perhaps their least memorable album (along with October) in the collective mainstream consciousness.

PS. I always loved that quote by Bono - "Fuck the pop kids; We don't need 'em." - after they just released possibly their most poppy album of all time (ATYCLB notwithstanding). Ah, the irony of Zoo TV!

 

[lazarus]

I again agree with most of what you're saying, though let's be honest - Achtung Baby was probably their most "poppy" album ever up until that point, even moreso than The Joshua Tree.

That's deranged. It wasn't even poppier than the previous album, which had very accessible, multi-demographic singles in Desire, Angel Of Harlem, All I Want Is You. Joshua Tree had the big three singles as well as a couple deeper cuts that could easily have done well chart-wise. Trip Through Your Wires couldn't be any poppier.

Some of the songs on Achtung Baby had big choruses, ok. But many of them were cloaked in abrasion and dissonance, and clearly not meant to go down smoothly. You use The Fly as an example, but that wasn't exactly a safe choice for a lead single, considering Bono is speak-singing the lines in the verses, and does the bridge in an atypical falsetto. The whole strategy for the album was to invert everything the band had recently become known for, so that doesn't equal "pop" to me.

That it became so popular is testament to its brilliance and the fact that the band was big enough that they had a captive audience of sorts who were willing to give it a chance. It only sounds mainstream in retrospect because there wasn't much at the time that sounded like it.

 

[jeevey]

And because it influenced what came after.

 

[The Slow Loris]

That's deranged. It wasn't even poppier than the previous album, which had very accessible, multi-demographic singles in Desire, Angel Of Harlem, All I Want Is You. Joshua Tree had the big three singles as well as a couple deeper cuts that could easily have done well chart-wise. Trip Through Your Wires couldn't be any poppier.

Some of the songs on Achtung Baby had big choruses, ok. But many of them were cloaked in abrasion and dissonance, and clearly not meant to go down smoothly. You use The Fly as an example, but that wasn't exactly a safe choice for a lead single, considering Bono is speak-singing the lines in the verses, and does the bridge in an atypical falsetto. The whole strategy for the album was to invert everything the band had recently become known for, so that doesn't equal "pop" to me.

That it became so popular is testament to its brilliance and the fact that the band was big enough that they had a captive audience of sorts who were willing to give it a chance. It only sounds mainstream in retrospect because there wasn't much at the time that sounded like it.

Deranged? Ok, your way to express your opinion aside, let me just say I have to respectfully disagree. I do not believe an album has to sound like, for instance, Rubber Soul to be a pop album. Sargent Pepper and Revolver were also great pop albums. You said it yourself: Achtung Baby was "cloaked" in different sounds (different for U2). The structures were very pop however. In many ways, Rattle & Hum was just as risky, as it hardly incorporated the influences of the time. It tried to bring the 50s and 60s back as a "roots" album. Clearly the public couldn't digest that as easily as the very danceable, party friendly Achtung Baby. But consider my opinion deranged if you like, even though every casual U2 fan at the time had it on their party playlist.

 

[djerdap]

Laz is right. It is deranged.

 

[LemonMelon]

Underneath all of that distortion, WGRYWH is an excellent pop song. EBTTRT, Mysterious Ways and Ultraviolet also have high-quality, accessible hooks. But as is the case with any truly great U2 album, there's a lot more to it than that. I would by no means call Achtung Baby a pop album, particularly since it was so far ahead of the curve at the time of its release and is very insular from a lyrical standpoint, but it's complex enough to successfully use those elements to its advantage.

 

[AEON]

Joshua Tree had the big three singles as well as a couple deeper cuts that could easily have done well chart-wise. .

When JT came out - there was NOTHING else like it on the radio. Even the reviews conceded that there were no obvious "hits" on the record (yet it produced the "big three singles" you mentioned).

 

[The Slow Loris]

When JT came out - there was NOTHING else like it on the radio. Even the reviews conceded that there were no obvious "hits" on the record (yet it produced the "big three singles" you mentioned).

So true.

 

[The Slow Loris]

Laz is right. It is deranged.

Love your insight

 

[The Slow Loris]

Underneath all of that distortion, WGRYWH is an excellent pop song. EBTTRT, Mysterious Ways and Ultraviolet also have high-quality, accessible hooks. But as is the case with any truly great U2 album, there's a lot more to it than that. I would by no means call Achtung Baby a pop album, particularly since it was so far ahead of the curve at the time of its release and is very insular from a lyrical standpoint, but it's complex enough to successfully use those elements to its advantage.

Absolutely agreed, but I would say that it was a Pop album, and Edge and Bono both say the same thing. Bono even says that Nirvana's Nevermind was one of the greatest "pop albums" of all time. But what does he know, right?

 

[LuckyNumber7]

In retrospect it's a "pop" album. At the time it wasn't. I can't say that for certainty, because I was born in 92. But the point stands. Sure, it has a pop structure to it (so does a lot of music, it is *generalized* as pop), but if we are looking at the idea of "pop" as "friendly" to music listeners or "mainstream", it's a completely different story.

 

[AEON]

a sensibility that U2 almost totally lost on, ironically, the Pop album. As Bono once said, "You hold onto something so tightly, you've already lost it." They put a lot of work into that album -- and believe me, they wanted that album to be huge as well. They forgot about their sensibilities, however, and focussed more on the shine. Which is ok. But, because of this, it's perhaps their least memorable album (along with October) in the collective mainstream consciousness.

I always thought the actual title, "POP," doomed the album before it got out of the gate. I always thought "Gone" would have been a perfect title.

 

[Edge Evans]

MIAmi

 

[AEON]

MIAmi

Not my first choice, but still better than POP

 

[david]

When JT came out - there was NOTHING else like it on the radio. Even the reviews conceded that there were no obvious "hits" on the record (yet it produced the "big three singles" you mentioned).

And still, do this day, Streets, Still Haven't Found, WOWY, Bullet, God's Country, One Tree Hill, still get radio play.

 

[AEON]

And still, do this day, Streets, Still Haven't Found, WOWY, Bullet, God's Country, One Tree Hill, still get radio play.

Exactly - great songs are great songs. It's that simple. They transcend the "times" - so to speak. When JT came out bands like Poison, Bon Jovi, Salt N Pepa, Europe, and Club Nouveau dominated the radio. Alternative radio (in the US) was owned by bands like REM, Eurythmics, and INXS.

The Joshua Tree was an artistic statement (as was UF, just not quite as successful). At this time, U2 was not pandering to the trends - they simply wanted to make something beautiful, epic, and unforgettable. The fact that it ended up being a huge hit was nothing short of miracle.

While Achtung Baby is still my favorite U2 album, you can certainly hear the influences of other alternative bands that were big at the time: The Stone Roses, Jesus and Mary Chain, My Bloody Valentine (listen to that intro to Wild Horses again), Jesus Jones, and The Happy Mondays - just to name a few.

 

[david]

Yeah, they were influenced by the Manchester scene during the making of Achtung Baby. My Bloody Valentine was also influential along with The Pixies who toured with U2. Edge was also listening to Nine Inch Nails at the time.

 

[The Slow Loris]

Exactly - great songs are great songs. It's that simple. They transcend the "times" - so to speak. When JT came out bands like Poison, Bon Jovi, Salt N Pepa, Europe, and Club Nouveau dominated the radio. Alternative radio (in the US) was owned by bands like REM, Eurythmics, and INXS.

The Joshua Tree was an artistic statement (as was UF, just not quite as successful). At this time, U2 was not pandering to the trends - they simply wanted to make something beautiful, epic, and unforgettable. The fact that it ended up being a huge hit was nothing short of miracle.

While Achtung Baby is still my favorite U2 album, you can certainly hear the influences of other alternative bands that were big at the time: The Stone Roses, Jesus and Mary Chain, My Bloody Valentine (listen to that intro to Wild Horses again), Jesus Jones, and The Happy Mondays - just to name a few.

Finally, someone who writes the truth! This post should be framed for all to use as a frame of reference.

 

[U2DMfan]

Deranged? Ok, your way to express your opinion aside, let me just say I have to respectfully disagree. I do not believe an album has to sound like, for instance, Rubber Soul to be a pop album. Sargent Pepper and Revolver were also great pop albums. You said it yourself: Achtung Baby was "cloaked" in different sounds (different for U2). The structures were very pop however. In many ways, Rattle & Hum was just as risky, as it hardly incorporated the influences of the time. It tried to bring the 50s and 60s back as a "roots" album. Clearly the public couldn't digest that as easily as the very danceable, party friendly Achtung Baby. But consider my opinion deranged if you like, even though every casual U2 fan at the time had it on their party playlist.

Define pop music as specifically as you can.

 

[U2DMfan]

When JT came out - there was NOTHING else like it on the radio. Even the reviews conceded that there were no obvious "hits" on the record (yet it produced the "big three singles" you mentioned).

You too, Obi-Wan.

Give us your definition of pop music.

I know it's tough, but both of you (you and Loris) try.

I promise I won't play semantics, but will use the spirit of your definition.

 

[AEON]

Yeah, they were influenced by the Manchester scene during the making of Achtung Baby. My Bloody Valentine was also influential along with The Pixies who toured with U2. Edge was also listening to Nine Inch Nails at the time.

Agreed - thankfully, I loved the Manchester scene and MBV....

The unfortunate result of AB's success is that U2 continued to follow and no longer lead.

 

[AEON]

You too, Obi-Wan.

Give us your definition of pop music.

I know it's tough, but both of you (you and Loris) try.

I promise I won't play semantics, but will use the spirit of your definition.

It's definitely a gray line. It's probably more about intention than anything else. Sort of like - when making a record - do the artists think, "is this the music we want to make" vs "is this the music that will take us to the top?"

You can't really predict a phenomenon - and that's what JT was. Nobody would have guessed when it first came out (read the reviews) it was going to be one of the most successful albums of the 80's.

The same is true with a band like The National in today's environment. It seems to me that they've built a decent following making the music they want to make. However - if Trouble Will Find Me ends up being the best seller of the decade - it was a lucky accident where art met the culture's thirst at exactly the right moment ( a moment that can't be predicted).

 

[lazarus]

The Joshua Tree was an artistic statement (as was UF, just not quite as successful). At this time, U2 was not pandering to the trends - they simply wanted to make something beautiful, epic, and unforgettable. The fact that it ended up being a huge hit was nothing short of miracle.

While Achtung Baby is still my favorite U2 album, you can certainly hear the influences of other alternative bands that were big at the time: The Stone Roses, Jesus and Mary Chain, My Bloody Valentine (listen to that intro to Wild Horses again), Jesus Jones, and The Happy Mondays - just to name a few.

...and neither JT nor AB were made with the thought that it would be something definitely popular with mainstream audiences. In the case of the latter, the band was backing away from familiar sounds that had brought them huge success. Jesus Jones' big breakthrough album didn't even come out 'til 91 so I doubt U2 was influenced by that. Same with EMF. While they did acknowledge the Manchester scene as something they were listening to, blending it with metallic Eastern European sounds and proto trip-hop beats (So Cruel, Tryin' To Throw) takes it pretty far away from Happy Mondays and Stone Roses.

It's definitely a gray line. It's probably more about intention than anything else. Sort of like - when making a record - do the artists think, "is this the music we want to make" vs "is this the music that will take us to the top?"

With ATCYLB, there was a bit of a retreat, to simpler tracks (remember Eno's insistence on spending more time writing and less time actually recording) and the "classic" U2 guitar sound. So it's hard to say that this wasn't a more calculated move to recapture the mainstream audience that had abandoned them by the end of the 90s.

 

[Christopheru2]

no idea what to expect

im not sure what to expect from the new album ?

which direction they will go ?
why they are working with danger mouse?

and one more question, what would be sales for the new album ?

i know that they were disappointed by the sales of NLOTH

IT sold 1,3 million in the us, but climates have changed

nowadays its hard for musicians to have a platinum album in the usa and multi-platinum is extremely rare

 

[AEON]

...and neither JT nor AB were made with the thought that it would be something definitely popular with mainstream audiences.

I would agree that Achtung Baby is not a blatant attempt at success. However, unlike Joshua Tree, the album does sound like an album of it's time (which to me is a good thing because I loved the bands that influenced them). Nothing in the 80's sounded like UF or JT

Jesus Jones' big breakthrough album didn't even come out 'til 91 so I doubt U2 was influenced by that.

Their debut album, Liquidizer, did have some success. And, Doubt did come out in early 1991 - when U2 was mixing and adding flourishes to Achtung Baby.

While they did acknowledge the Manchester scene as something they were listening to, blending it with metallic Eastern European sounds and proto trip-hop beats (So Cruel, Tryin' To Throw) takes it pretty far away from Happy Mondays and Stone Roses.

Well - it was those sort of "proto trip-hop beats" I was referring to. I agree that U2 did not engage in the neo-psychedelia that immersed the rest of the Manchester scene, but they did tap into that "groovy" vibe with Mysterious Ways and Until the End of the World - and the How Soon is Now guitar effect that was borrowed for Soho's huge club hit, Hippy Chick - that we can hear as So Cruel picks up steam.

I also agree with you that AB was influenced by "metallic Eastern European sounds" which only further illustrates my point that it sounds like a product (thought it is the best product) of the times.

With ATCYLB, there was a bit of a retreat, to simpler tracks (remember Eno's insistence on spending more time writing and less time actually recording) and the "classic" U2 guitar sound. So it's hard to say that this wasn't a more calculated move to recapture the mainstream audience that had abandoned them by the end of the 90s.

Agreed.

 

[lazarus]

Taking elements from various local scenes does not mean the album sounds like a product of its times. Pieces here and there sound familiar (the guitar on Until The End Of The World sounds very similar to a Happy Mondays), but as a whole the album did NOT sound like any other band. And it was ahead of its time to the extent that that almalgamation of influences weren't reflected so quickly in other bands due to Nirvana's influence on alt. rock post-1991. Zooropa pulled even further away from this trend and sounds even more out of step 18 months later.

 

[AEON]

Taking elements from various local scenes does not mean the album sounds like a product of its times.

I respectfully disagree.

Pieces here and there sound familiar (the guitar on Until The End Of The World sounds very similar to a Happy Mondays), but as a whole the album did NOT sound like any other band.

I don't think I suggested U2 sounded like any one band. But just about every sound, every effect, every beat, every rift, every distortion can be immediately traced to something the alternative rock scene was up to in the early 90's.

And it was ahead of its time to the extent that that almalgamation of influences weren't reflected so quickly in other bands due to Nirvana's influence on alt. rock post-1991.

I can't agree that Achtung Baby was ahead of it's time.

Zooropa pulled even further away from this trend and sounds even more out of step 18 months later.

This I agree with.

 

[U2DMfan]

The Joshua Tree was an artistic statement (as was UF, just not quite as successful). At this time, U2 was not pandering to the trends - they simply wanted to make something beautiful, epic, and unforgettable. The fact that it ended up being a huge hit was nothing short of miracle.

While Achtung Baby is still my favorite U2 album, you can certainly hear the influences of other alternative bands that were big at the time: The Stone Roses, Jesus and Mary Chain, My Bloody Valentine (listen to that intro to Wild Horses again), Jesus Jones, and The Happy Mondays - just to name a few.

Hell, I could find several albums that were evocative of the Americana or roots-based heartland rock that showed up on TJT. Springsteen's "Born in the USA", Mellencamp's "Scarecrow", Tom Petty's "Heartland", Bruce Hornsby's "The Way it Is". To name a few.

Would you like to compare the 'commerciality' of these^ artists with those you previously mentioned (Stone Roses, Happy Mondays, MBV, etc.)?

I don't think you would.

But I don't really understand the argument here anyway.

This is what I know - U2 used to love to take the underground to the overground. Until POPmart broke their heart. It's that simple.

The 'new' of Achtung Baby was relative to the mainstream. In America, at least, where have such a massive audience for English-speaking music, those albums (MBV's first one, Stone Roses first one) were all a fart in the wind. You could argue that nothing 'new' was there and you would probably be right. But in terms of taking that underground sound to the overground, it was fairly new. But especially - and THIS is what is important - relative to who U2 were before The Fly hit the airwaves.

The idea that burying the Edge's guitars in the mix, much less muddying his tone or muddying Bono's vox was a "poppy" move is simply farce.

 

[U2DMfan]

It's definitely a gray line. It's probably more about intention than anything else. Sort of like - when making a record - do the artists think, "is this the music we want to make" vs "is this the music that will take us to the top?"

You can't really predict a phenomenon - and that's what JT was. Nobody would have guessed when it first came out (read the reviews) it was going to be one of the most successful albums of the 80's.

The same is true with a band like The National in today's environment. It seems to me that they've built a decent following making the music they want to make. However - if Trouble Will Find Me ends up being the best seller of the decade - it was a lucky accident where art met the culture's thirst at exactly the right moment ( a moment that can't be predicted).

That's a difficult answer to digest and quickly respond, I'll come back to it later.

While I agree that TJT was far from a guaranteed 'pop hit' but if I am going to compare it to Achtung, it is not even...not EVEN comparable. U2 basically said to their audience "yeah, you know that U2 you fell in love with for ten years? That humongous big-selling, Grammy winning monster album? And the MOVIE we made and that whole sound? Yeah. We're gonna burn most of that down and try to sound like not-U2. And our sonic inspiration? The one niche that isn't selling loads of records. Brilliant strategy for a 'pop' album, right?"