They're working on new songs!

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
U2girl said:


U2 knew a lot less about the songwriting and the craft in the early years so a Ocean or a EPAA was more likely to appear. Zooropa is hard to compare to other U2 albums as it was done mid-tour, even that had songs Stay and Dirty Day which most U2 fans shouldn't have a problem with. How much of a gamble, really, is releasing something when you're called U2 and millions will listen to you?

Fast Cars was, according to Bono, done on the last day or recording Bomb.

U2 was 20 and 24 years into their career with ATYCLB and Bomb. It's much harder to come up with new sounds after being in the game for so long. And to me ATYCLB was a new direction for U2, they never did pop songs before. I also consider LAPOE and Fast cars new to the band. As for universal appeal...U2 deals with universal topics: faith, love, sexuality, politics..and for every EPAA there was a Pride or UF.

Passengers to me is still more accessible than the Radiohead albums I heard. Again, two bands with different way of making music.


I agree with this.

Yes, some spontaneity is great. But the songs being presented, such as "Elvis Presley and America" or odd tunes from "Zooropa", "Pop" or OS1, are also the most ignored and disliked songs of U2's career. In other words, while there is some "fun" in spontaneity, it appears that the overwhelming majority of U2 fans do not like it. This is reflected everywhere - from fan comments on boards like these, to lack of radio-play, to low sales, to comments from DJ's, etc.

But when U2 explore a musical genre that's new to them, then add their U2 twist to it, they do get some great tunes, like "Mofo" or "Lemon". There are gems on those 90's releases - and indeed, these are also the songs that the overwhelming majority of the fans do appreciated. So it's not a matter of spontaneity - it's a matter of U2 making a genre into their own style.

With that in mind, I think U2 succeeded doing just that on HTDAAB with "Love & Peace or Else" and "Fast Cars". While one can argue that ATYCLB is "safe" (which is one of the reasons I like HTDAAB more), U2 started to branch out on "Bomb". Even "Vertigo" was different from their prior works (with the closest being arguably "Mysterious Ways", which is also unique in the U2 catalog).

For me, spontaneity isn't right or needed. It's U2's willingness to explore out of their safe zone that makes great songs. U2 needed ATYCLB for many reasons. With the continued success of HTDAAB, U2 can now do the necessary exploration. Even I hope we don't have another "safe" album, but I don't want something like OS1 either.
 
doctorwho said:



I agree with this.

Yes, some spontaneity is great. But the songs being presented, such as "Elvis Presley and America" or odd tunes from "Zooropa", "Pop" or OS1, are also the most ignored and disliked songs of U2's career. In other words, while there is some "fun" in spontaneity, it appears that the overwhelming majority of U2 fans do not like it. This is reflected everywhere - from fan comments on boards like these, to lack of radio-play, to low sales, to comments from DJ's, etc.

But when U2 explore a musical genre that's new to them, then add their U2 twist to it, they do get some great tunes, like "Mofo" or "Lemon". There are gems on those 90's releases - and indeed, these are also the songs that the overwhelming majority of the fans do appreciated. So it's not a matter of spontaneity - it's a matter of U2 making a genre into their own style.

With that in mind, I think U2 succeeded doing just that on HTDAAB with "Love & Peace or Else" and "Fast Cars". While one can argue that ATYCLB is "safe" (which is one of the reasons I like HTDAAB more), U2 started to branch out on "Bomb". Even "Vertigo" was different from their prior works (with the closest being arguably "Mysterious Ways", which is also unique in the U2 catalog).

For me, spontaneity isn't right or needed. It's U2's willingness to explore out of their safe zone that makes great songs. U2 needed ATYCLB for many reasons. With the continued success of HTDAAB, U2 can now do the necessary exploration. Even I hope we don't have another "safe" album, but I don't want something like OS1 either.

:up: this is very similiar to how I feel about it. Spontaneity by U2 has yielded some interesting songs. But most of their great stuff are things they have worked on alot and were anything but spontanious. Spending time on the details, layering songs, working them out over the long haul is what they do best and how they create most of their best work overall.
 
I really am starting not to care about the next album one way or another. The more I listen to HTDAAB and read the band's recent quotes the more I realize that U2 are a pretty uninteresting band right now. I'm 100 times more hyped for Peter Gabriel's next album later this year than U2's album.
 
shart1780 said:
I'm 100 times more hyped for Peter Gabriel's next album later this year than U2's album.

I think you are definately in the minority on that one! :wink:

Gabriel is OK, never been a big fan. I think his Genesis stuff is just weird and uninteresting. But different strokes for different folks because obviously alot of people like it. I actually like pre Invisible Touch Phil Collins Genesis more than the Gabriel era. :shrug:
 
Have you ever listened to his solo stuff? It's not nearly as strange. A lot of it is extremely catchy too. His last album was released in 2002 but managed to take my slot for favorite Gabriel album (which is no easy feat). His records are all expertly written. The lyrics are in my opinion some of the best written in modern music (listen to Blood of Eden), his production is flawless, his instrumentation is so incredibly layered you could listen to a song a hundred times and still find new things and he's still managed to stay just as creative today as he was 20 years ago. The man is a genius, and I'm not at all ashamed that I'm an all out Peter Gabriel fanboy.

His stuff does take a bit of effort to get into though. It's so worth it.
 
There's good reason to believe so. There's already word going around about how it will be published this year. Also, he stated that he'd like to go on a small tour before the album's release that's a little more stripped down than his full blown ones. He has a bunch of dates planned already. So yeah, it looks like there's a good chance it's this years. Would I be suprised if it's not? No... this is Peter Gabriel after all.

Even if it's not he's got two other projects, Big Blue Ball and Son of Ovo, which are finished but still have yet to be released, that could come out at any time.
 
shart1780 said:
Have you ever listened to his solo stuff? It's not nearly as strange. A lot of it is extremely catchy too. His last album was released in 2002 but managed to take my slot for favorite Gabriel album (which is no easy feat). His records are all expertly written. The lyrics are in my opinion some of the best written in modern music (listen to Blood of Eden), his production is flawless, his instrumentation is so incredibly layered you could listen to a song a hundred times and still find new things and he's still managed to stay just as creative today as he was 20 years ago. The man is a genius, and I'm not at all ashamed that I'm an all out Peter Gabriel fanboy.

His stuff does take a bit of effort to get into though. It's so worth it.

Oh, I'm not saying he sucks or anything. I have just never been a big fan and I was just pointing out that most are not going to be looking more forward to new Gabriel vs new U2. Thats all.

I actually have several of his solo albums including his last one. Like I said, they are OK to me. Certainly better than alot of other stuff out there at the moment. I do prefer his solo stuff over his Genesis stuff by a mile. A few good songs with the solo stuff. I just cant get into him like some other artists. I'm sure the songs I like by him would be considered the commercial poppy stuff that his diehards probably cut on. Sort of like U2 fans cut on alot of their "hits" also because they are popular. The whole musical fascism deal.
 
shart1780 said:
I really am starting not to care about the next album one way or another. The more I listen to HTDAAB and read the band's recent quotes the more I realize that U2 are a pretty uninteresting band right now.

That line is so 1989.

I can't wait for U2 to try something completely different and interesting, which I have a feeling they will eventually do, no matter how long it takes. What I gather from the recent quotes is that the band is starting to reach their usual dead-end with the 00's sound...they might force another just-barely-different-from-the-others record, but I predict that within two albums, we'll get a completely different and surprising record out of them.

Not that I really give a damn about that. All I care about is whether the songs are good or not, which most people here seem to not care about in the slightest...as if experimentation and new sounds automatically yield great songwriting. :shrug:
 
it's interesting to me that what people here seem to consider the "spontaneous"side of U2 feels more often than not like the more "contrived" side to me

I am not going to advocate U2 to try and make a boring album
but I also think it doesn't make a lot of sense to expect a band who are about 30 years into their career to dramatically change their sound again in a succesful way

I am looking forward to the new album
 
Last edited:
I know the songs will be good. Atomic Bomb was good, it just wasn't blow you away and make you crap your pants good like their other stuff was. All of their song releases since then have been no better to my ears. Just super accessible stadium stuff that doesn't have much depth musically or lyrically. Saying I'm not excited at all would be a lie. I'll always be excited by new U2 stuff. I'm just not nearly as excited as I used to be.

And U2 might decide to go in a new direction with the new album, but I doubt it will be anything too drastic. I haven't seen any reason to believe it will be. I'm not asking for a more spontaneous U2, I'm just hoping for a more deep and interesting sound from them. Maybe they should even innovate a bit. I just want to hear something fresh.
 
Last edited:
I hope people aren't missing the point:

THE SONGS.

It can be experimental as all hell. You can have Bono singing through a roll of toilet paper, Larry patting his knees to a rhythm, Edge playing a can of soup, and Adam farting into a microphone. It'll be experimental, but if there's no song at the core of it, then it sucks.

The reason everyone likes ATYCLB and HTDAAB? Because they have GOOD SONGS.

Now they have to take those GOOD SONGS and fuck with them a bit to make it sound more interesting.

But the songs have to be there.
 
It's a given that U2 can write good songs. It's just that if I'm hearing the same good songs over and over again I tend to get kind of bored.
 
doctorwho said:



I agree with this.

Yes, some spontaneity is great. But the songs being presented, such as "Elvis Presley and America" or odd tunes from "Zooropa", "Pop" or OS1, are also the most ignored and disliked songs of U2's career. In other words, while there is some "fun" in spontaneity, it appears that the overwhelming majority of U2 fans do not like it. This is reflected everywhere - from fan comments on boards like these, to lack of radio-play, to low sales, to comments from DJ's, etc.

But when U2 explore a musical genre that's new to them, then add their U2 twist to it, they do get some great tunes, like "Mofo" or "Lemon". There are gems on those 90's releases - and indeed, these are also the songs that the overwhelming majority of the fans do appreciated. So it's not a matter of spontaneity - it's a matter of U2 making a genre into their own style.

With that in mind, I think U2 succeeded doing just that on HTDAAB with "Love & Peace or Else" and "Fast Cars". While one can argue that ATYCLB is "safe" (which is one of the reasons I like HTDAAB more), U2 started to branch out on "Bomb". Even "Vertigo" was different from their prior works (with the closest being arguably "Mysterious Ways", which is also unique in the U2 catalog).

For me, spontaneity isn't right or needed. It's U2's willingness to explore out of their safe zone that makes great songs. U2 needed ATYCLB for many reasons. With the continued success of HTDAAB, U2 can now do the necessary exploration. Even I hope we don't have another "safe" album, but I don't want something like OS1 either.
Nice post, I much agree with it.
 
Mrs. Garrison said:
You guys are crazy, Bomb sucked.

thank you for your insight

The John Tree, you're absolutely right. My favourite portion of U2's career is indubitably the 90's, but all the songs I like are just that...songs. Acrobat, The Fly, Mofo, Please, Zooropa, Your Blue Room, Lemon... you can call them "experimental," but they're all brilliant songs. if U2 can change their sound and still write good songs (which I think they can; they've done it numerous times already), then I'm all for it. But U2 is definitely past the "experimentation for the sake of experimentation" phase.
 
OMG the new album cover has leaked!!!!!!!11 :faint:





















































































































































































































































































U2.jpg
 
AtomicBono said:


thank you for your insight

The John Tree, you're absolutely right. My favourite portion of U2's career is indubitably the 90's, but all the songs I like are just that...songs. Acrobat, The Fly, Mofo, Please, Zooropa, Your Blue Room, Lemon... you can call them "experimental," but they're all brilliant songs. if U2 can change their sound and still write good songs (which I think they can; they've done it numerous times already), then I'm all for it. But U2 is definitely past the "experimentation for the sake of experimentation" phase.

I don't mind if it's not experimental as long as it's interesting. It's just that experimentation usually is interesting. Bomb was just such a boring album all around. After you get over the catchiness of the songs there's nothing left to immerse yourself in. It's so bare bones and boring. The lyrics weren't anything to write home about either.
 
Last edited:
shart1780 said:


I don't mind if it's not experimental as long as it's interesting. It's just that experimentation usually is interesting. Bomb was just such a boring album all around. After you get over the catchiness of the songs there's nothing left to immerse yourself in. It's so bare bones and boring. The lyrics weren't anything to write home about either.

I totally agree with you. I do like some of the songs but of all their albums its probably my least favorite at the moment, not because it is all that bad but because it doesnt challenge me in any real way. Two of the best songs i have heard from the Bomb sessions are Mercy and Fast Cars, which either didnt make the album or were just on limited edition or deluxe edition. Im sure Bomb is good when you compare it to the crap on the radio, but when the band leaves their most interesting music on the shelf we are left wondering what might have been.
 
LemonMelon said:


That line is so 1989.

I can't wait for U2 to try something completely different and interesting, which I have a feeling they will eventually do, no matter how long it takes. :

Your prayers have been answered. SPIDERMAN THE MUSICAL...

:|
 
if people dont care about the new album, why come into a forum dedicated to the new album? simply to bitch and moan? and try and get your point across like you do in every other thread on this site? one of the reasons i dont post to much anymore is simply because of that, wherever you go on the site, the same people are going over and over and over there same opinion about how bomb "sucked" or didnt challenege them etc, we get it, move on.
 
KUEFC09U2 said:
if people dont care about the new album, why come into a forum dedicated to the new album? simply to bitch and moan? and try and get your point across like you do in every other thread on this site?

People like it. It's their favourite activity to release the pressure when they get home after a hard day working.

KUEFC09U2 said:
one of the reasons i dont post to much anymore is simply because of that, wherever you go on the site, the same people are going over and over and over there same opinion about how bomb "sucked" or didnt challenege them etc, we get it, move on.
Me too. It's one of the reasons I don't post as frequently as before. I prefer now only to read and laugh to myself.
 
Well I was listening to the Beach Clips. And let me tell you I want the new album now. It sounds so awesome
 
There you go, anyone who doesn't like Bomb should be banned! Unless they keep it to themselves and praise every new song or album u2 puts out as "the greatest ever".

I think part of being a u2 fan is appreciating their music that appeals to you, and being able look forward to what they may do next. Not everyone likes the latest work, just as not everyone likes that peroid from 93-97 when the more experimental works came out. I would like to think that everyone can have their equal say here without offending someone who absolutely loves something someone else might not.

And remember too, people's taste not only vary but can change with time. When BOMB first came out i loved it, until i got tired of it and its one that i have trouble really getting back into. I like the fact the Vertigo was a straight up rock song with mass appeal. But other than OOTS and maybe SYCMIOYO the rest of the album was lacking IMHO. With some good songs like "fast cars" and "mercy" floating around i cant help thinking how great it could have all been.

and i do agree with you here:

maybe what might have been but also what could be.

cheers :)
 
Mrs. Garrison said:
There you go, anyone who doesn't like Bomb should be banned! Unless they keep it to themselves and praise every new song or album u2 puts out as "the greatest ever".

I think part of being a u2 fan is appreciating their music that appeals to you, and being able look forward to what they may do next. Not everyone likes the latest work, just as not everyone likes that peroid from 93-97 when the more experimental works came out. I would like to think that everyone can have their equal say here without offending someone who absolutely loves something someone else might not.

And remember too, people's taste not only vary but can change with time. When BOMB first came out i loved it, until i got tired of it and its one that i have trouble really getting back into. I like the fact the Vertigo was a straight up rock song with mass appeal. But other than OOTS and maybe SYCMIOYO the rest of the album was lacking IMHO. With some good songs like "fast cars" and "mercy" floating around i cant help thinking how great it could have all been.

and i do agree with you here:



cheers :)
who said you should be banned for not liking the album? go through the forum, you will see some on the names that have posetd in this thread, posting in various other threads, just express their opinion that they hate the 00's U2, and how they dont look forward to the new album because of it bla bla,

so if people feel so strongly about disliking this phase, why waste their own time posting in a forum that is dedicated to a new album from the 00's?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom