Steve Lillywhite: Best U2 album

[U2girl]

The best is yet to come | U2 news article from @U2



Do you think all this hype (best song ever with U2 - Eno, best album - Lillywhite and groundbreaking/innovative - Lanois) is helping or hurting this album ?

 

[Swan269]

Lillywhites comments on new album; Morocco sessions were scrapped

from the Sunday mirror via atu2




U2's legendary producer, Steve Lillywhite, claims the band's eagerly-awaited new album will be their BEST ever. He has worked with the band since their first album, Boy, was released in 1981, and now he is back in the studio with them as they put the finishing touches to their latest album prior to its October release.

Veteran DJ Tony Fenton said he met Steve and was struck by how the told how the famous producer was ranting about the new album. Tony said: "I met Steve recently and we got talking about the band's new album. He is so excited about the record and claims it's the best record they have ever done.

"I know people think he might say that -- but that's not the kind of thing somebody like Steve Lillywhite says easily. Like the rest of people who love music I'm so looking forward to it."

U2 even missed the recent Nelson Mandela Tribute Concert in London because they were so caught up in putting the final touches to the album at their Hanover Quay Studios in Dublin's Docklands.

The group recorded initially recorded a lot of new material in Morocco -- but then scrapped a lot of it and started again because they didn't think it was up to their high standards.

A source said: "U2 have never put out a dud record and they don't want to start now. In fact it's got to the stage with them that they want to put out a classic but still make it fresh and new. They know they are coming very close but they still have a bit of work to do yet."

The album is the first studio work the band will released since their smash hit How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb in 2004.

 

[last unicorn]

Half of this article is just speculation, especially the part about "scrapping" the Morrocco stuff. We agreed that this was a misinterpretation about what Edge said about the work on the new album several months ago ... I'd have to go back to look for his exact quote, but never trust a newspaper article that is quoting "a source". Apart from that, Lillywhite's comments, IF true, sound promising.

 

[rihannsu]

I agree, Lillywhite has never struck me as the type to overly hype something. He's been painfully honest about the first albums that he worked on especially how tortured the session were for October. He's one you can count on to tell the band when they suck and need to work harder so for him to be this excited to me is a very good sign. And the fact that all of the quotes about this being their best work yet have come from people other than the band itself is good news as well.

Dana

 

[Moser]

Best album ever......?

Considering U2's resume? Wow.

 

[sony]

 

[phanan]

I don't think all this hype is helping, but perhaps it really will be something special.

 

[Rosebud]

I will judge the music when it comes as objectively as possible, but right now all the excitement is really its own reward.

 

[LemonMelon]

Do you think all this hype (best song ever with U2 - Eno, best album - Lillywhite and groundbreaking/innovative - Lanois) is helping or hurting this album ?

I honestly couldn't care less. Why should someone else's opinion damage yours? It certainly won't hurt sales, if that's what you're asking.

 

[digitize]

Better than Achtung? We'll see... I'm reserving my judgment until I actually hear the thing.

 

[U2girl]

I honestly couldn't care less. Why should someone else's opinion damage yours? It certainly won't hurt sales, if that's what you're asking.

It won't affect my opinion, but do you really think a) this late in their career they can make their best album and b) the bigger the hype, the bigger the - potential - letdown.

This album already has a lot to live up to, and we didn't even hear anything yet.

 

[rihannsu]

It's one thing when you have the kind of commercial hype that is typical of Hollywood movies which can be very damaging because it is so often poorly targeted. But the enthusiam of individuals involved in a project is an entirely different kind of hype to me. This hype is still on the level of individuals commenting primarily to friends and fans that is being picked up by the press in some cases. It's not on the level of the ubiquitous talk show appearance hype circuit yet. Most of this is still primarily being seen by hardcore fans as the general public will be paying little if any attention even to the stuff in the mainstream press at this stage. I would hope that hardcore fans would be more worried about whether they like the album itself rather than whether it lives up to someone else's hype.

Dana

 

[bathiu]

Steve Lillywhite was the reason U2 started to work on HTDAAB again after Thomas in 2003/2004... so I guess he is veeeery honest when it comes to U2's work...
We'll see

 

[LemonMelon]

I would hope that hardcore fans would be more worried about whether they like the album itself rather than whether it lives up to someone else's hype.

 

[zoopop]

Steve Lillywhite was the reason U2 started to work on HTDAAB again after Thomas in 2003/2004... so I guess he is veeeery honest when it comes to U2's work...
We'll see

I remember reading an interview of Lillywhite about HTDAAB and he seemed not too excited about the album. It felt like he came in to patch things up the best he can. Can anyone confirm this?

 

[U2girl]

I think he praised Bomb.

 

[Utoo]

Here's hoping that it is indeed a misinterpretation that the Morocco sessions were scrapped. I'd love to hear what they sounded like, and for some reason have a feeling that we'd be sure to find something interesting in there, even if the band thought it was crap. Look at how the Axtung Beibi outtakes are received here (sure, part of the coolness factor is the fact that they're unreleased works-in-progress).

If it is true, then U2 have been doing a hell of a lot of "scrapping" in the last 8 years. We've got the botched HTDAAB sessions, the Rubin sessions, and now Morocco. I don't see the point of "starting over." You'd think that if all the Bono, etc., quotes about how they've had music pouring out of them, enough music for two albums at the least, then they'd be able to weed through and find some gems in there somewhere. Great bands (see sig ) have been able to put out great albums on an annual basis; U2 was able to do it at an average of every two years for their first two decades. I've never cared much that they've recently been taking four years, but now if they had four years of ideas since the last album, plus leftovers from previous albums, and several jamming & recording sessions in the last two years, I'd seriously have to call their songwriting skills into question if they really felt like it was all crap and had to start all over again--yet again.

Which is why I doubt that the Morocco sessions really were "scrapped."

 

[vaz02]

^ Any band could put out an album every year, great bands dont release any old crap.

 

[Salome]

Do you think all this hype (best song ever with U2 - Eno, best album - Lillywhite and groundbreaking/innovative - Lanois) is helping or hurting this album ?

I don't think it will do either
the only people who will remember these quotes when the album is released are the fans

it takes a certain kind of person to hold these quotes agin the band when the album comes out
and these people already have their mind made up to blast everything the band releases post 1999 anyway

 

[Utoo]

^ Any band could put out an album every year, great bands dont release any old crap.

The Beatles
Please Please Me (1963)
With The Beatles (1963)
A Hard Day's Night (1964)
Beatles for Sale (1964)
Help! (1965)
Rubber Soul (1965)
Revolver (1966)
Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band (1967)
Magical Mystery Tour (1967)
The Beatles ("The White Album") (1968)
Yellow Submarine (1969)
Abbey Road (1969)
Let It Be (1970)

The Who--not counting the newest album
My Generation (1965)
A Quick One (1966)
The Who Sell Out (1967)
Tommy (1969)
Who's Next (1971)
Quadrophenia (1973)
The Who By Numbers (1975)
Who Are You (1978)
Face Dances (1981)
It's Hard (1982)

U2--the first twenty years
Boy (1980)
October (1981)
War (1983)
The Unforgettable Fire (1984)
The Joshua Tree (1987)
Rattle and Hum (1988)
Achtung Baby (1991)
Zooropa (1993)
Passengers (1995)
Pop (1997)
All That You Can't Leave Behind (2000)

Other bands have done it (and I'm sure there are plenty more great bands who've done it that I don't feel like researching), and U2 has done it.

Sure, you can also look at the Stones who put out an album every 1-3 years for twenty-some-odd years and say that a third of those were purely crap. You can also say that the older a band gets, as the rest of their lives flesh out more and more, there's less time for writing music, etc. And I know that this "why are they taking four years" discussion has run its course several times over on the boards. All I'm saying is that if they're actually having several jam/brainstorming/recording sessions and scrapping them all several times over, that's just a little suspect.

 

[rihannsu]

Great bands (see sig ) have been able to put out great albums on an annual basis; U2 was able to do it at an average of every two years for their first two decades. I've never cared much that they've recently been taking four years, but now if they had four years of ideas since the last album, plus leftovers from previous albums, and several jamming & recording sessions in the last two years, I'd seriously have to call their songwriting skills into question if they really felt like it was all crap and had to start all over again--yet again.

Which is why I doubt that the Morocco sessions really were "scrapped."

The Beatles may have put out great albums every year, but they also burned out after that insane level of output. What did it come to was it seven years? None of their solo careers ever really came close to the Beatles stuff. U2 may not be putting out an album a year but they have also stayed together and stayed consistant a hell of lot more than any other act. I would think if you graphed their output compared to other artists the line would hold much steadier at a higher level than most. Even Springsteen and Dylan have had enormous peaks and valleys in their output. Why do people think every album has to be a masterpiece when you consider that in all other art endeavors masterpieces are few and far between. At least until you are dead then everything is worth gazillions. The great painters are only expected to be able to produce a true masterpiece every ten years or so.

Another thought I've had recently is that everybody keeps talking about the direction change on AB as if it was only about experimentation for the sake of artistic reasons but in reality it was no less of a response to R&H then ATYCLB was to Pop. One of the stated purposes was to reject anything that sounded like U2. They were deliberately chopping down the Joshua Tree. How is that any different except in terms of direction than the move to reconquer the mainstream with ATYCLB? For that matter the move from War to UF was just as much a rejection of the 'Onward Christian Soldiers' label they were getting about that time. All were in response to the reception of the previous albums, tours, etc. Is it somehow more valid if they are trying to loose all their fans rather than trying to win more? They spent ages trying to get a mix of WGRYWH that would conquer the charts. That's no different to the approach they took trying to put out hits on the last two albums. The only real challenge to the whole radio friendly schtick was to release the Fly but they new it wouldn't really be a hit, they were just taking advantage of the fact that they'd been out of sight and the hunger for new U2 pretty much guaranteed that radio would play it. Didn't they pull it after only three weeks for the more radio friendly MW? Edge pretty much said the only reason they did it was because they new the stations would play whatever they gave them at that point. So to cast the AB era as somehow more artistically true is pretty suspect.

Dana

 

[Utoo]

Again, all I'm saying is that to spend weeks writing and recording over and over again and come up with nothing is lame. You're either striving too hard for some unattainable perfection, or you've just lost your magic. In fact, if it's the former, I think your quote below is better stated to U2 themselves:

Why do people think every album has to be a masterpiece when you consider that in all other art endeavors masterpieces are few and far between.

As for the second half of your post...I don't really know what thread that was addressed to......but nice points, most of which get forgotten pretty frequently here--namely, that U2 were never any less "commercially minded" in 1991 or 1997 or 1980 than they are in 2008..it's just that they have more means, goods, and connections to push now than they did before. I think what people miss from the 90s is the image, the charade of rebellious "fuck you, we don't care," even though they did care the whole time.

 

[Salome]

I think what people miss from the 90s is the image, the charade of rebellious "fuck you, we don't care," even though they did care the whole time.

I people miss U2 being sexy and ironic
even though U2 being sexy and ironic was a charade as it's not who they are
U2 is about as sexy as my aunt and as ironic as Alanis Morisette
back at the start of the 90s they had to try something though to prevent people getting sick of them
the irony now is that people miss the charade and flame the band for being who they are

 

[Salome]

Again, all I'm saying is that to spend weeks writing and recording over and over again and come up with nothing is lame. You're either striving too hard for some unattainable perfection, or you've just lost your magic.

I tend to agree
I also don't think the Morocco sessions were binned
the actual recordings over there probably wont see the light of day, but I think the ideas they found there are the backbone for the new album

 

[Reggie Thee Dog]

I tend to agree
I also don't think the Morocco sessions were binned
the actual recordings over there probably wont see the light of day, but I think the ideas they found there are the backbone for the new album

QFT...

 

[akann]

The bands listed didn't do 2 year world tours after each album now did they?? In saying that, I think that u2 should be more frequent in releasing albums, and Bono should spend more of his time with the band than with politicians...

 

[david]

The Beatles quit touring all together... so it was easier for them to churn out as much material as they did in the short amount of time they were together.

 

[Utoo]

^True.

 

[Mr. Millennium]

I tend to agree
I also don't think the Morocco sessions were binned
the actual recordings over there probably wont see the light of day, but I think the ideas they found there are the backbone for the new album

And I think that was the plan from the start.... go to Morocco, capture the spirit, develop some ideas, and take those back to Dublin.

 

[Muldfeld]

from the Sunday mirror via atu2
A source said: "U2 have never put out a dud record and they don't want to start now. In fact it's got to the stage with them that they want to put out a classic but still make it fresh and new. They know they are coming very close but they still have a bit of work to do yet."

The album is the first studio work the band will released since their smash hit How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb in 2004.[/B]

The above bold portion is what worries me. Even if it isn't attributable to Lillywhite, I'm concerned that the praise is given in context of the absurdity that U2 have never released a dud record. Since "Achtung Baby", U2 have released plenty of duds, especially by the standard view of the band that Pop was a dud.

I hope they don't streamline everything, so it's mainstream-friendly. I'm a bit worried.