One last single off SOI or not ?

[trainmaniac]

I still think that U2 is doing great and relevant music, but they simply don't know which of their songs are the best to reach wider audiences.
Let's remind SOI promotion. Basically they have chosen singles based on "what people want to hear", and so they've thrown Miracle, EBW and SFS, which are OK but are not as good as Raised by Wolves, Reach me Now or Crystal Ballroom. New audiences will only hear an old band if they catch their attention with something that does not sound old. Miracle, EBW and SFS are more or less the kind of tunes U2 have been doing since ATYCLB, so I'm not surprised at all that SOI didn't get the attention that more creative songs like those on the 2nd half of the disc deserve.

They have done great music for SOI. But they choose to promote same old sounding tunes. For me, this is the only problem with U2's relevance nowadays.

 

[Hollow Island]

You're right. The perception of u2 being old and doing the same old thing is entirely their fault because that's what they present to the world with their album promo. They've covered new ground with the last 2 albums(less so with SOI) but seem to hide it, whereas they used to flaunt it.

Sent from my XT1034 using U2 Interference mobile app

 

[JamietheEdgefan]

The public, including critics, pretty much already thinks this. SOI and NLOTH were duds, and got mediocre reviews.

I'm not suggesting that U2 put out sub-par material, only that they could release songs that don't fit the preconceived concept of the SOE as singles.

U2 need to know they're not going to have hits. Rock bands generally don't get hits, and old artists definitely don't get hits.

If you were in their shoes, your thinking would be dangerously close to "let's give the fans what they want," which is an artistic death sentence (I think your reaction to their shoes would be pretty similar to what theirs is).

John Frusciante sent out a message to subscribers yesterday, and I'll quote it:

I don’t think people know what they want, except that the general public thinks that artists should sound as their audience expects them to. The general public did not “want” Jimi Hendrix’s music before 1967. They did not know that such sounds were possible. How could they have wanted it before they heard it? Did the public “want” Sgt. Pepper before it came out? That would have been impossible, because no album had ever sounded remotely like that. Yet musicians who aim at becoming or remaining popular have gotten into this stupid habit of attempting to give the public “what it wants”.

This statistic might be indicative of something too:

David Bowie's new song, Blackstar, is 10 minutes long and arguably the strangest, most uncommercial thing he's ever done. It has 2.9 million views on youtube in a week.

Get On Your Boots, the official video, has 3.2 million hits in six years, and it was designed to be a hit.

Give the people what they want...

Yeah sorry, i didn't mean to imply non-commercial/unpopular music was sub-par, i was just trying to separate commercially successful from non-successful. Poor choice of words, maybe...

I also don't think this is the path u2 should be taking, or that i'd do it were i them - just that i'm trying to imagine what they're thinking (if they are indeed still focused on 'hits' etc).

So i don't necessarily think what they're doing is right, or that it will actually get them what they want... but i do suspect they are (or at least have been) thinking in this certain way, and it will determine whether or not they do certain things (like release riskier singles).

I think you make a really good point about the futility of trying to give the public what it wants, and the past 2 albums have surely proven that, try as hard as they can, u2 can't seem to craft a hit. They did at least show a couple of signs that they had accepted this fact (Adam and Bono had throwaway comments over the summer, mid-tour about making music just for fans, and re-thinking that sort of thing altogether).

u2 might be able to craft more critically respected (and maybe even commercially successful!) music by throwing caution to the wind... but i'm not sure they (necessarily) see it that way.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Whoever designed Boots to be a hit was a moron.

That shit sandwich sucks.

 

[Mack_Again]

whoever didn't release Moment of Surrender as a lead single like Brian advised is idiot

 

[The_acrobat]

Whoever designed Boots to be a hit was a moron.

That shit sandwich sucks.

Why that song was allowed to ever leave the studio, let alone be the lead single from the album and be a live staple for the next 2 years, is beyond me. I literally can't wrap my mind around it.

 

[Gonna Run 2 U]

To me "single" just means an official youtube video accompanying a song these days. I think Iris deserves to be one of those songs off of SOI given the context of the song and that it is arguably the best off the album.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[trainmaniac]

To me "single" just means an official youtube video accompanying a song these days. I think Iris deserves to be one of those songs off of SOI given the context of the song and that it is arguably the best off the album.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

God, no! I know it's a special song, but it's more of the same old sounding U2. It's the path to irrelevance.

 

[Gonna Run 2 U]

God, no! I know it's a special song, but it's more of the same old sounding U2. It's the path to irrelevance.

I don't agree with this at all. There have been many people that I've played this for who have never really listened to U2 and on separate occasions told me they later played it on repeat. It also made people who have listened to them many years ago want to rediscover them because it was familiar sounding enough to bring back memories.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Do not play the song that sounds like the U2 that people love!

 

[aMansAman]

It also made people who have listened to them many years ago want to rediscover them because it was familiar sounding enough to bring back memories.

^ that's what I don't like (not in connection with Iris) when it comes to U2's single selection ... I even can't remember the last really ballsy (if that's a word) single ... I think for me personally it was the one and only DISCOTHEQUE ...

I don't think people would like to rediscover U2 just because they hear familiar U2 sounds.

A friend of mine stopped listening to U2 after POP ... he really digged their 90s stuff and was distracted by their rather commercial post 2000 stuff.

What would have happened if U2 released Sleep Like A Baby Tonight as first single off SOI? I would have loved that .. or take Troubles .. or even California ...

The SOI singles are again the save route ... Miracle/EBW/SFS ..

ON TOPIC: I think there won't be a last single ... and by single I even count some "official" video single or digital release ...


I wish the first SOE Single would really be something like "oh, no way: That's U2?"

 

[trainmaniac]

Invisible could also have been a good single, IMHO.

 

[prbiker15]

Invisible did much better than all of the SOI singles when it was released. I think it would have gotten more interest if it was the lead single for the album.

 

[Gonna Run 2 U]

Sleep like a baby tonight and the troubles are my least favorite songs off the album so I am glad they were not singles. Different tastes of U2 for us all.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[U2girl]

whoever didn't release Moment of Surrender as a lead single like Brian advised is idiot

Because releasing a 7+ minute slow song is a good idea for a lead single ?

It's much more puzzling why Miracle, after Boots tanked (and Magnificent or Breathe stared at them right in the face as a lead singe material), got to be the lead single.

If it has to be another "let's rawk" lead single, Cedarwood road is a better candidate and also points more towards the Dublin-ness of the album. The Troubles sounds like something radio stations might be inclined to play as a lead single.

Right now, I'd go with Raised by wolves. Given that a third single like SFS is more popular than anything off the last two albums, who's to say they won't put out one last single ?

 

[U2girl]

The public, including critics, pretty much already thinks this. SOI and NLOTH were duds, and got mediocre reviews.

I'm not suggesting that U2 put out sub-par material, only that they could release songs that don't fit the preconceived concept of the SOE as singles.

U2 need to know they're not going to have hits. Rock bands generally don't get hits, and old artists definitely don't get hits.

If you were in their shoes, your thinking would be dangerously close to "let's give the fans what they want," which is an artistic death sentence (I think your reaction to their shoes would be pretty similar to what theirs is).

John Frusciante sent out a message to subscribers yesterday, and I'll quote it:

I don’t think people know what they want, except that the general public thinks that artists should sound as their audience expects them to. The general public did not “want” Jimi Hendrix’s music before 1967. They did not know that such sounds were possible. How could they have wanted it before they heard it? Did the public “want” Sgt. Pepper before it came out? That would have been impossible, because no album had ever sounded remotely like that. Yet musicians who aim at becoming or remaining popular have gotten into this stupid habit of attempting to give the public “what it wants”.

This statistic might be indicative of something too:

David Bowie's new song, Blackstar, is 10 minutes long and arguably the strangest, most uncommercial thing he's ever done. It has 2.9 million views on youtube in a week.

Get On Your Boots, the official video, has 3.2 million hits in six years, and it was designed to be a hit.

Give the people what they want...

Frusciante should get back with RHCP. In the 60's rock was still a fresh genre or music and new stuff kept popping up. A little harder to come up with another Hendrix or Pepper decades later.

Two of the comparisons are solo acts who operate differently to bands. And the third one is a band (with arguably the best songwriting team) at the peak of its powers. And per wiki, saint Pepper didn't exactly come out of nowhere.

Freak Out! by the Mothers of Invention has also been cited as having influenced Sgt. Pepper.[33] According to the author Philip Norman, during the Sgt. Pepper recording sessions McCartney repeatedly stated: "This is our Freak Out!"[34] The music journalist Chet Flippo states that McCartney was inspired to record a concept album after hearing Freak Out![33][nb 3]

 

[U2Larry54]

With the recent rumour of no Europe dates and work on SOE instead...should U2 choose one last single off SOI to keep the focus on the album until the autumn tour dates happen or not ?

If so, what should it be ?

I think it should be Volcano. Its one of the shorter songs on the album, has a great beat, and would be the most likely to get good radio airplay!