So Whats Wrong With NLOTH

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
Batfink27 said:
After all the hypes died down and we realise the albums not very good and flopping,whats wrong with it? I think realeasing the awul Boots as a first single was a start. The poor Crazy and Stand Up dont help and theres just not enough songs like Magnificent.
Click to expand...

Are you on drugs man? you honestly think this album is flopping?? and standup is shit? oh boy...
 
I love Boots, maybe it wasn't the best choice for the first single but it's a brilliant song with a great riff. IGCIIDGCT has really grown on me and is one of my favourites on the album, so that's two of the so-called weak three on the album that I love!!

SUC does have some cringe worthy moments but it's not as bad as a lot of people say. I'm not a fan of the chanting in UC but the song still has some beautiful moments.

I'm loving the album more and more each day and I'm sure that as the months go by and the tour kicks in, sales will get stronger and NLOTH will rightly be heralded as a classic, especially if and when its companion album is released.
 
Rich79 said:
Also, If you want to get into details why it isn't amongst the greats...

-Edge digs into his usual toolbox and doesn't break away from it

-Eno uses too many "cheerful" synth and keyboard sounds for an album that seems like it was supposed to have a darker tone.

-Bono's yelling voice is unnecessary in most places; it very poorly compliments the music on MOS

-The opening track doesn't hit you with a bang; its just kinda there.

-Boots feels like Vertigo pt.2

-Crazy Tonight feels like Crumbs pt.2

-The hype feels like it was way out of left-field (even more than normal) after hearing the material

-The promotional machine didn't seem to get into gear as quickly as it usually does

-Choruses that are "big" and have that "anthem" sound, another way of not breaking away from the norm.

-And finally, just saying the name of the song doesn't make for a great chorus "No, No line" and "At the Moment of Surrender..."
Click to expand...

I fully disagree here ..
tell me WHAT album do you like then?
 
The_acrobat said:
Last night I went out with 4 friends. We covered all the usual topics, and then the topic of the new U2 album came up. All these friends are fairweather U2 fans. They were all on board when ATYCLB and HTDAAB were tearing up the charts, and wouldn't admit to liking U2 back in the late 90s for fear of seeming uncool. Now it seems that they are off the bandwagon since the album seems to be getting a lukewarm response.

Yes, I realize it's selling well in spite of the economy, their age, spring release vs. fall release, blah blah blah. The fact is that Boots failed. NLOTH is currently selling based on the U2 name, nothing more. Had they had a successful first single, that people actually thought was a good song, you'd see a major difference. Not just in the sales, but in the opinions of the people who have bought the album. The casual fan's perception of this album has been tainted because of "Boots". The same way people were put off from POP because of Discotheque, despite the fact that the rest of the album was much better and had much more depth than that stupid song. It's all about first impressions, and you only get to make one.
Click to expand...

Discotheque is a great song .. i still love that riff ... Bono on MTV : "it is just a little song about love" on the discoteque bus.

i still love that song. I still remember buying this CD-single and see the video for the first time. It blew me away, especially edges outfit :p:p
I really would love to hear this song live once again!

Boots blew me away too ... actually I start liking the song more and more ... then I did when it came out.
 
Rich79 said:
I think I can sum it up. (This is just a theory).

After POP came out to luke-warm receptions, the band came up with this half-assed excuse for it not being "good" by saying it wasn't quite finished when it was released. So, going back to their "safety zone" for the next two albums was the only thing they could think. Now, was there any way they were going to not take their time on every subsequent release after POP? Nope. So, deadlines were either non-existent or pushed back in order to keep working on material for new albums. This method of "over-cooking" the songs works just fine for ATYCLB and HTDAAB; two very "calculated" albums that were made to feel like a more radio-friendly U2 and you don't get there by just rushing through it. All of a sudden, it was decided that they would go experimental again, because they can't just repeat themselves for another album. However, the same method of "over-cooking" the songs happened (i.e.- the delay from releasing it last fall until now). This method does not work for such an experiment. Going to a very experimental and innovative place requires a big feeling of spontanaeity (probably spelled that wrong) and somewhere in the process all of that feeling got sucked out by working too hard and too long on it. Now we have an album of songs that sounded like they started off very experimentally, but were covered up along the way by the typical U2 jangly Edge guitar and big anthemic choruses because of a need for safety and not to let it get too "weird" like POP. If POP suffers from being under-done, then NLOTH suffers from being over-done.

Once again, just a theory, and it may be quite biased because POP is my favorite album of all time by any band and the reason I love U2 so much is their 90's material. It's like sticking a knife in my back every time they say POP wasn't finished and that they didn't have enough time. My point is that back when they only gave themselves a good 2 years between albums, they were cranking out some really great material, and ever since 1997 it feels like they just decided to be less spontaneous for the rest of their career. Don't get me wrong, I like everything they've come out with (including NLOTH), but the feeling of this balls-to-the-wall, badass, crazy, funny, do whatever we want no matter how over-the-top U2 that existed in the 90's is long gone and now it feels like they are awkwardly trying to get it back without stepping on any of their fans' toes and I feel that if they're going to proceed with so much caution for the rest of their career, then we're going to keep getting albums that are good, but don't have that certain "spark" that most of their material has. All I can say is that I hope NLOTH works as a sort of transition album and that the next one (Songs of Ascent) turns out to be the true start of a few more innovative, experimental albums.
Click to expand...

It's like you stepped inside my head and pulled out my exact thoughts. Couldn't sum it up any better.
 
i can tell you whats wrong with the album?

it sounds mechanical

it sounds forced

its dishonest

its clumsy

its tired

it adds nothing to u2's 'legacy'

i played it 3 times, fell asleep... :down:
 
CosmoKramer said:
JOFO-I think you are # 3 below :hmm:
I would love to try and breakdown the "types" of fans because there are clearly different types. Now, what they are is not simple to define. I feel there are several groups.

1-80's/classic U2-Standard "U2 by the numbers" and nothing experimental (Pride, With or With Out you, Bad, ect...)
2-90's/00's Experimental U2 (Zooropa, Lemon, Miami, Mofo, Fez-Being Born, ect..)
3-Classicmental U2- "Catchy" U2 songs (e.g. mysterious ways, One, Pride, Streets, Beautiful Day, Elevation, Vertigo). Now Im not saying Vertigo or Elevation are as good as One or Pride but they are all "catchy" songs. Please note that "catchy" might be the wrong word here because some may feel Miami is catchy).
4-Duenowrong U2- Its all good

Im sure there are more "sub-groups" but I am a Classicmental and JOFO, that is what I think you are. Feel free to add groups to the above list because there are more.....
Click to expand...

Classic U2 vs Experimental...

Please point me to another song in U2's catalog prior to Joshua Tree, or any other song in the history of rock music that sounds like Where the Streets Have No Name. A whole new guitar was invented for WOWY. Having a tough time seeing how The Joshua Tree wasn't experimental. I think some people who have grown up with U2 forget/don't realize that this band has always been unique. Even War was very experimental with martial tracks like SBS and Seconds.

Experimenting with dance technology in the 90's doesn't equal experimental.

NLOTH is their most experimental album since the Joshua Tree; they're trying to create new sounds here. AB and POP, as much as I love and like them respectively, were all about adapting other musical cultures to their own style. A cruel way to put it is genre whorring. JT and NLOTH (and to a lesser extent, War) are about creating styles, not adapting other peoples style. If you think AB was experimental, then objectively you have to say Rattle & Hum was too, even if you don't as much perfer the style they adapated.

#3, you could just rename as the Best Of group.

btw, Discotheque sucked. Boom Cha's, bubble gum, Villiage People outfits were not the way to package an album that was competing with Smashing Pumpkins, Pearl Jam and Foo Fighters and even as late as 1997, Nirvana's legacy. Not as a lead off single anyway.
 
Rich79 said:
I think I can sum it up. (This is just a theory).

After POP came out to luke-warm receptions, the band came up with this half-assed excuse for it not being "good" by saying it wasn't quite finished when it was released. So, going back to their "safety zone" for the next two albums was the only thing they could think. Now, was there any way they were going to not take their time on every subsequent release after POP? Nope. So, deadlines were either non-existent or pushed back in order to keep working on material for new albums. This method of "over-cooking" the songs works just fine for ATYCLB and HTDAAB; two very "calculated" albums that were made to feel like a more radio-friendly U2 and you don't get there by just rushing through it. All of a sudden, it was decided that they would go experimental again, because they can't just repeat themselves for another album. However, the same method of "over-cooking" the songs happened (i.e.- the delay from releasing it last fall until now). This method does not work for such an experiment. Going to a very experimental and innovative place requires a big feeling of spontanaeity (probably spelled that wrong) and somewhere in the process all of that feeling got sucked out by working too hard and too long on it. Now we have an album of songs that sounded like they started off very experimentally, but were covered up along the way by the typical U2 jangly Edge guitar and big anthemic choruses because of a need for safety and not to let it get too "weird" like POP. If POP suffers from being under-done, then NLOTH suffers from being over-done.

Once again, just a theory, and it may be quite biased because POP is my favorite album of all time by any band and the reason I love U2 so much is their 90's material. It's like sticking a knife in my back every time they say POP wasn't finished and that they didn't have enough time. My point is that back when they only gave themselves a good 2 years between albums, they were cranking out some really great material, and ever since 1997 it feels like they just decided to be less spontaneous for the rest of their career. Don't get me wrong, I like everything they've come out with (including NLOTH), but the feeling of this balls-to-the-wall, badass, crazy, funny, do whatever we want no matter how over-the-top U2 that existed in the 90's is long gone and now it feels like they are awkwardly trying to get it back without stepping on any of their fans' toes and I feel that if they're going to proceed with so much caution for the rest of their career, then we're going to keep getting albums that are good, but don't have that certain "spark" that most of their material has. All I can say is that I hope NLOTH works as a sort of transition album and that the next one (Songs of Ascent) turns out to be the true start of a few more innovative, experimental albums.
Click to expand...

I agree quite a lot with what you are saying, but there's a crack in your theory in the fact that the release of Pop took longer than it should have - in fact 4 years elapsed between Zooropa and Pop, since Passengers can't be counted as a regular U2 album and the release of Pop was indeed delayed.
 
65980 said:
(c) Theme/Tone of the album is kind of schizophrenic, as mentioned with the songs above. I don't really get any kind of "feeling" from the album as a whole. Lots of ambition, yes, but I'm not sure what the point of it all is...
Click to expand...

You don't know...

You don't get it do you?

It's not linear...

:)
 
Rich79 said:
Also, If you want to get into details why it isn't amongst the greats...

-Edge digs into his usual toolbox and doesn't break away from it

-Eno uses too many "cheerful" synth and keyboard sounds for an album that seems like it was supposed to have a darker tone.

-Bono's yelling voice is unnecessary in most places; it very poorly compliments the music on MOS

-The opening track doesn't hit you with a bang; its just kinda there.

-Boots feels like Vertigo pt.2

-Crazy Tonight feels like Crumbs pt.2

-The hype feels like it was way out of left-field (even more than normal) after hearing the material

-The promotional machine didn't seem to get into gear as quickly as it usually does

-Choruses that are "big" and have that "anthem" sound, another way of not breaking away from the norm.

-And finally, just saying the name of the song doesn't make for a great chorus "No, No line" and "At the Moment of Surrender..."
Click to expand...

LOL. This is a funny post, I hope you were joking.

However, I respect your opinion if you were for real. In which case, thankfully you have probably discovered the formula for the perfect album....

From now on

1. Even though you are a guitarist Edge, the usual buzzing, whirring, background echoey repetitive rhythm noise, and the high pitched echo, not to mention the ambient Pink Floyd-ish type guitar parts and clanging electric/acoustic strings, nor the 80s style chiming, or the spaced out solo not often heard from you, or the so-ambient-you-think-it's-a-keyboard-not-a-guitar sound, or the harder crunching riffs, or the riffs so distorted and rythmic they start to sound electronic, or the ballady acoustic rare sounds, or the scorching rock guitar or ambient mellow guitar SHOULD EVER BE USED ON A U2 ALBUM AGAIN... Edge - make up some new sounds that are like none of the above....!!!

2.Brian Eno - please remember what the album you co-wrote and performed was SUPPOSED TO SOUND LIKE... and this time, work it out before you start the recording and writing process. There is nothing so pesky as an album that sounds like it wasn't supposed to. Especially when Brian Eno gets involved and, can you imagine, decides to add a whole lot of bizarre intricate yet keyboardy poppy yet joyful and atmospheric sounds and layers... I tell you what, that man had some audacity ruining the new album with his strange beepy atmospherics. RUINED!

3. Bono - your "yelling voice" should not be used. Ever. It ruins the music. Please STOP SHOUTING on that bloody rock and roll music on the transistor wireless radio. Nothing worse than Bono yelling, I have liked U2's music since 1980 apart from Bono yelling...

4. Opening tracks on all albums should not be "just there". They must hit with a bang. ALL OPENING TRACKS ON ALL ALBUMS, even ones that are supposed to be dark but with no yelling, should STILL HIT WITH A BANG!!! No exceptions. It no longer matters that I really love the opening track and it's growing on me every listen, it shouldn't just be there on the album.

5. No songs should sound like a previous U2 song, especially Vertigo. Where The Streets Have No Name always let me down because it sounded like a photocopied left over from The Unforgettable Fire... And don't mention that guitar chiming part on Beautiful Day which sounded like something off Boy... How dare they.

6. No songs to sound like Crumbs From Your Table.... Especially ones THAT DON'T.... Oooooookkkkkkkkkk..... To left field for even me to say something about.

7. Make sure fan PERCEPTION of the hype around a new album is only matched by the finished product which they haven't heard yet. No promotion, no talking about it, no pre-release reviews, nothing. It just gets people's hopes up. Let them find the album in a flea-market somewhere or nowhere at all.

8. But at the same time - GET THE PROMOTIONAL MACHINE INTO GEAR because that is something U2 failed miserably on this time. I have never seen such a lack of promotion for such an over-hyped, and supposedly 'dark' album. Next time, get on Letterman, several nights a week if you have to. Maybe try playing a few rooftops in some of the world's biggest cities. Or even leak badly audible versions of some of the biggest songs played loudly on some beach, onto You Tube. But yes, this time, lack of promotion has killed the album, I ESPECIALLY hate the music because of lack of promotion, BUT I ESPECIALLY hate it for being too hyped up.

9. Dear U2 - please, no more "big choruses" or "anthems". You have NEVER been any good at them since 1980 so don't start trying it now OK. And make sure you don't over hype your chorus-free non-anthemic masterpieces, but please do promote them.

10. And finally, just saying the name of the song doesn't make for a great chorus "No, No line" and "At the Moment of Surrender"... The name of the song should in fact contain words and phrases that do not in any way reflect any lyrics from the song. So, No Line... should have been called "Cut Off My Garlic Fried Arm" and Moment of... should have been called "Pony Rides Available Here" and of course Magnificent... should have been called "Droppings of the Australian Eastern Grey Nosed Flying Fox". Also, this is one of the reasons for U2's past failings... fancy calling a song "Pride (In The Name Of Love)" because the words "In The Name Of Love" were in the chorus and "Pride" was also in the song!!! OUTRAGEOUS. No wonder that was an all time clunker of a song.

Well, there we go U2 lads, the formula for the perfect U2 album.

:huh:
 
65980 said:
(c) Theme/Tone of the album is kind of schizophrenic, as mentioned with the songs above. I don't really get any kind of "feeling" from the album as a whole. Lots of ambition, yes, but I'm not sure what the point of it all is.
Click to expand...

Why does there have to be a point? Why can't the sound waves just hit your ear drums, move the ossicles in your middle ear, stimulate the fluid in your cochlea, transmit a signal up your eighth cranial nerve to your brainstem, continue higher to your thalamus, and then on to your auditory cortex, eliciting a sensory and emotional experience that you decide you either like or dislike?
 
I've always been curious as to what is the reason of starting such a thread, asking a question but then never participating in it yourself?
 
Luke2 said:
LOL. This is a funny post, I hope you were joking.

However, I respect your opinion if you were for real. In which case, thankfully you have probably discovered the formula for the perfect album....

From now on

1. Even though you are a guitarist Edge, the usual buzzing, whirring, background echoey repetitive rhythm noise, and the high pitched echo, not to mention the ambient Pink Floyd-ish type guitar parts and clanging electric/acoustic strings, nor the 80s style chiming, or the spaced out solo not often heard from you, or the so-ambient-you-think-it's-a-keyboard-not-a-guitar sound, or the harder crunching riffs, or the riffs so distorted and rythmic they start to sound electronic, or the ballady acoustic rare sounds, or the scorching rock guitar or ambient mellow guitar SHOULD EVER BE USED ON A U2 ALBUM AGAIN... Edge - make up some new sounds that are like none of the above....!!!

2.Brian Eno - please remember what the album you co-wrote and performed was SUPPOSED TO SOUND LIKE... and this time, work it out before you start the recording and writing process. There is nothing so pesky as an album that sounds like it wasn't supposed to. Especially when Brian Eno gets involved and, can you imagine, decides to add a whole lot of bizarre intricate yet keyboardy poppy yet joyful and atmospheric sounds and layers... I tell you what, that man had some audacity ruining the new album with his strange beepy atmospherics. RUINED!

3. Bono - your "yelling voice" should not be used. Ever. It ruins the music. Please STOP SHOUTING on that bloody rock and roll music on the transistor wireless radio. Nothing worse than Bono yelling, I have liked U2's music since 1980 apart from Bono yelling...

4. Opening tracks on all albums should not be "just there". They must hit with a bang. ALL OPENING TRACKS ON ALL ALBUMS, even ones that are supposed to be dark but with no yelling, should STILL HIT WITH A BANG!!! No exceptions. It no longer matters that I really love the opening track and it's growing on me every listen, it shouldn't just be there on the album.

5. No songs should sound like a previous U2 song, especially Vertigo. Where The Streets Have No Name always let me down because it sounded like a photocopied left over from The Unforgettable Fire... And don't mention that guitar chiming part on Beautiful Day which sounded like something off Boy... How dare they.

6. No songs to sound like Crumbs From Your Table.... Especially ones THAT DON'T.... Oooooookkkkkkkkkk..... To left field for even me to say something about.

7. Make sure fan PERCEPTION of the hype around a new album is only matched by the finished product which they haven't heard yet. No promotion, no talking about it, no pre-release reviews, nothing. It just gets people's hopes up. Let them find the album in a flea-market somewhere or nowhere at all.

8. But at the same time - GET THE PROMOTIONAL MACHINE INTO GEAR because that is something U2 failed miserably on this time. I have never seen such a lack of promotion for such an over-hyped, and supposedly 'dark' album. Next time, get on Letterman, several nights a week if you have to. Maybe try playing a few rooftops in some of the world's biggest cities. Or even leak badly audible versions of some of the biggest songs played loudly on some beach, onto You Tube. But yes, this time, lack of promotion has killed the album, I ESPECIALLY hate the music because of lack of promotion, BUT I ESPECIALLY hate it for being too hyped up.

9. Dear U2 - please, no more "big choruses" or "anthems". You have NEVER been any good at them since 1980 so don't start trying it now OK. And make sure you don't over hype your chorus-free non-anthemic masterpieces, but please do promote them.

10. And finally, just saying the name of the song doesn't make for a great chorus "No, No line" and "At the Moment of Surrender"... The name of the song should in fact contain words and phrases that do not in any way reflect any lyrics from the song. So, No Line... should have been called "Cut Off My Garlic Fried Arm" and Moment of... should have been called "Pony Rides Available Here" and of course Magnificent... should have been called "Droppings of the Australian Eastern Grey Nosed Flying Fox". Also, this is one of the reasons for U2's past failings... fancy calling a song "Pride (In The Name Of Love)" because the words "In The Name Of Love" were in the chorus and "Pride" was also in the song!!! OUTRAGEOUS. No wonder that was an all time clunker of a song.

Well, there we go U2 lads, the formula for the perfect U2 album.

:huh:
Click to expand...
:lol: I usually don't quote entire posts when they're only just a couple posts up
but this one was too hilarious not to :applaud:

:up:
 
Due to being outsold by Resident Evil 5, U2 obviously did not incorporate enough survival-horror themes into NLOTH.

 
Luke2 said:
LOL. This is a funny post, I hope you were joking.

However, I respect your opinion if you were for real. In which case, thankfully you have probably discovered the formula for the perfect album....

From now on

1. Even though you are a guitarist Edge, the usual buzzing, whirring, background echoey repetitive rhythm noise, and the high pitched echo, not to mention the ambient Pink Floyd-ish type guitar parts and clanging electric/acoustic strings, nor the 80s style chiming, or the spaced out solo not often heard from you, or the so-ambient-you-think-it's-a-keyboard-not-a-guitar sound, or the harder crunching riffs, or the riffs so distorted and rythmic they start to sound electronic, or the ballady acoustic rare sounds, or the scorching rock guitar or ambient mellow guitar SHOULD EVER BE USED ON A U2 ALBUM AGAIN... Edge - make up some new sounds that are like none of the above....!!!

2.Brian Eno - please remember what the album you co-wrote and performed was SUPPOSED TO SOUND LIKE... and this time, work it out before you start the recording and writing process. There is nothing so pesky as an album that sounds like it wasn't supposed to. Especially when Brian Eno gets involved and, can you imagine, decides to add a whole lot of bizarre intricate yet keyboardy poppy yet joyful and atmospheric sounds and layers... I tell you what, that man had some audacity ruining the new album with his strange beepy atmospherics. RUINED!

3. Bono - your "yelling voice" should not be used. Ever. It ruins the music. Please STOP SHOUTING on that bloody rock and roll music on the transistor wireless radio. Nothing worse than Bono yelling, I have liked U2's music since 1980 apart from Bono yelling...

4. Opening tracks on all albums should not be "just there". They must hit with a bang. ALL OPENING TRACKS ON ALL ALBUMS, even ones that are supposed to be dark but with no yelling, should STILL HIT WITH A BANG!!! No exceptions. It no longer matters that I really love the opening track and it's growing on me every listen, it shouldn't just be there on the album.

5. No songs should sound like a previous U2 song, especially Vertigo. Where The Streets Have No Name always let me down because it sounded like a photocopied left over from The Unforgettable Fire... And don't mention that guitar chiming part on Beautiful Day which sounded like something off Boy... How dare they.

6. No songs to sound like Crumbs From Your Table.... Especially ones THAT DON'T.... Oooooookkkkkkkkkk..... To left field for even me to say something about.

7. Make sure fan PERCEPTION of the hype around a new album is only matched by the finished product which they haven't heard yet. No promotion, no talking about it, no pre-release reviews, nothing. It just gets people's hopes up. Let them find the album in a flea-market somewhere or nowhere at all.

8. But at the same time - GET THE PROMOTIONAL MACHINE INTO GEAR because that is something U2 failed miserably on this time. I have never seen such a lack of promotion for such an over-hyped, and supposedly 'dark' album. Next time, get on Letterman, several nights a week if you have to. Maybe try playing a few rooftops in some of the world's biggest cities. Or even leak badly audible versions of some of the biggest songs played loudly on some beach, onto You Tube. But yes, this time, lack of promotion has killed the album, I ESPECIALLY hate the music because of lack of promotion, BUT I ESPECIALLY hate it for being too hyped up.

9. Dear U2 - please, no more "big choruses" or "anthems". You have NEVER been any good at them since 1980 so don't start trying it now OK. And make sure you don't over hype your chorus-free non-anthemic masterpieces, but please do promote them.

10. And finally, just saying the name of the song doesn't make for a great chorus "No, No line" and "At the Moment of Surrender"... The name of the song should in fact contain words and phrases that do not in any way reflect any lyrics from the song. So, No Line... should have been called "Cut Off My Garlic Fried Arm" and Moment of... should have been called "Pony Rides Available Here" and of course Magnificent... should have been called "Droppings of the Australian Eastern Grey Nosed Flying Fox". Also, this is one of the reasons for U2's past failings... fancy calling a song "Pride (In The Name Of Love)" because the words "In The Name Of Love" were in the chorus and "Pride" was also in the song!!! OUTRAGEOUS. No wonder that was an all time clunker of a song.

Well, there we go U2 lads, the formula for the perfect U2 album.

:huh:
Click to expand...

Amen .. well written down. I wonder how this album would sound : crap ? :p
 
Batfink27 said:
After all the hypes died down and we realise the albums not very good and flopping,whats wrong with it? I think realeasing the awul Boots as a first single was a start. The poor Crazy and Stand Up dont help and theres just not enough songs like Magnificent.
Click to expand...

Only boots drags this album down a notch from where it could be.
EVERYTHING ELSE IS JUST FINE

ITS STILL U2'S 3RD BEST EFFORT BY A LONG WAY... AND THAT'S AN AWESOME EFFORT 18 YEARS AFTER THEIR BEST AND 23 YEARS AFTER THEIR 2ND BEST
 
Luke2 said:
LOL. This is a funny post, I hope you were joking.

However, I respect your opinion if you were for real. In which case, thankfully you have probably discovered the formula for the perfect album....

From now on

1. Even though you are a guitarist Edge, the usual buzzing, whirring, background echoey repetitive rhythm noise, and the high pitched echo, not to mention the ambient Pink Floyd-ish type guitar parts and clanging electric/acoustic strings, nor the 80s style chiming, or the spaced out solo not often heard from you, or the so-ambient-you-think-it's-a-keyboard-not-a-guitar sound, or the harder crunching riffs, or the riffs so distorted and rythmic they start to sound electronic, or the ballady acoustic rare sounds, or the scorching rock guitar or ambient mellow guitar SHOULD EVER BE USED ON A U2 ALBUM AGAIN... Edge - make up some new sounds that are like none of the above....!!!

2.Brian Eno - please remember what the album you co-wrote and performed was SUPPOSED TO SOUND LIKE... and this time, work it out before you start the recording and writing process. There is nothing so pesky as an album that sounds like it wasn't supposed to. Especially when Brian Eno gets involved and, can you imagine, decides to add a whole lot of bizarre intricate yet keyboardy poppy yet joyful and atmospheric sounds and layers... I tell you what, that man had some audacity ruining the new album with his strange beepy atmospherics. RUINED!

3. Bono - your "yelling voice" should not be used. Ever. It ruins the music. Please STOP SHOUTING on that bloody rock and roll music on the transistor wireless radio. Nothing worse than Bono yelling, I have liked U2's music since 1980 apart from Bono yelling...

4. Opening tracks on all albums should not be "just there". They must hit with a bang. ALL OPENING TRACKS ON ALL ALBUMS, even ones that are supposed to be dark but with no yelling, should STILL HIT WITH A BANG!!! No exceptions. It no longer matters that I really love the opening track and it's growing on me every listen, it shouldn't just be there on the album.

5. No songs should sound like a previous U2 song, especially Vertigo. Where The Streets Have No Name always let me down because it sounded like a photocopied left over from The Unforgettable Fire... And don't mention that guitar chiming part on Beautiful Day which sounded like something off Boy... How dare they.

6. No songs to sound like Crumbs From Your Table.... Especially ones THAT DON'T.... Oooooookkkkkkkkkk..... To left field for even me to say something about.

7. Make sure fan PERCEPTION of the hype around a new album is only matched by the finished product which they haven't heard yet. No promotion, no talking about it, no pre-release reviews, nothing. It just gets people's hopes up. Let them find the album in a flea-market somewhere or nowhere at all.

8. But at the same time - GET THE PROMOTIONAL MACHINE INTO GEAR because that is something U2 failed miserably on this time. I have never seen such a lack of promotion for such an over-hyped, and supposedly 'dark' album. Next time, get on Letterman, several nights a week if you have to. Maybe try playing a few rooftops in some of the world's biggest cities. Or even leak badly audible versions of some of the biggest songs played loudly on some beach, onto You Tube. But yes, this time, lack of promotion has killed the album, I ESPECIALLY hate the music because of lack of promotion, BUT I ESPECIALLY hate it for being too hyped up.

9. Dear U2 - please, no more "big choruses" or "anthems". You have NEVER been any good at them since 1980 so don't start trying it now OK. And make sure you don't over hype your chorus-free non-anthemic masterpieces, but please do promote them.

10. And finally, just saying the name of the song doesn't make for a great chorus "No, No line" and "At the Moment of Surrender"... The name of the song should in fact contain words and phrases that do not in any way reflect any lyrics from the song. So, No Line... should have been called "Cut Off My Garlic Fried Arm" and Moment of... should have been called "Pony Rides Available Here" and of course Magnificent... should have been called "Droppings of the Australian Eastern Grey Nosed Flying Fox". Also, this is one of the reasons for U2's past failings... fancy calling a song "Pride (In The Name Of Love)" because the words "In The Name Of Love" were in the chorus and "Pride" was also in the song!!! OUTRAGEOUS. No wonder that was an all time clunker of a song.

Well, there we go U2 lads, the formula for the perfect U2 album.

:huh:
Click to expand...

Gold
 
It's a good album which is unfortunately hamstrung by the bands conservative inclusion of the middle 3 tracks, and Bono's continuing fascination with hurting good songs with some blindingly poor lyrics. What's worse lyrically on this album the clangers are generally right next to some lovely lyrics, which simply indicates a lack of care.

Stand Up Comedy is one of the worst POS I've heard from a serious band in a long time, a jesus jones b-side done by a u2 cover band just off a tour with a Led Zeppelin cover band. One of the songs (perferably Boots or Crazy Tonight) would have served well enough as a change of pace.

The album also lacks a defining killer single which isn't that big of a problem but certainly doesn't help matters.

The album also is pretty fractured narratively and ultimately lacks an coherent overall theme, which is probably due to the different sessions, and the decision to add Lillywhite into the mix late on.

Still a good album, and in my opinion the above while minor stops the album short of being a true great.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

dan_smee
I listened to No Line on the Horizon right through tonight for the first time in about 10 years…
2 3
Replies
83
Views
2K
lazarus
lazarus
N
  • Locked
NBA 2022-23 Thread
46 47 48
Replies
1K
Views
45K
U2inUtah
U2inUtah
T
A quick thought on NLOTH
Replies
26
Views
3K
AndrewCowley
A
A
The Little Stranger chapter 14
Replies
0
Views
523
annj
A
A
The little stranger chapter 18
Replies
0
Views
496
annj
A

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom