This new best of scares me. Here's why.

[Shaliz]

Re: Re: Re: This new best of scares me. Here's why.

I'm still wondering if that s*** contract for 3 Best ofs specified, detailed that each best of was going to be just a single CD or not (I'm talking about regular editions, not limited ones with B-sides). If it wasn't, I don't understand why on earth U2 cannot release 4 CD Set Definitive Best Of, including all their singles since 1979 onwards and many other memorable songs. That would be the only one way to make a serious and real DEFINITIVE Best of

If the contract just detailed that they must release a Best of, they could have determined the content of the release, the number of songs and discs on it

Well, one reason why they might not be releasing a 4 cd box set right now could be because they are saving that sort of thing for when they really are winding down their career and are ready to release, as you say, a real definitive best of. From everything they've said in the last while, they aren't done yet. I think the kind of "best of" you're talking about, which I really hope they do release some day, wouldn't come out anytime soon. I seriously think this best of is just meant to bring in new fans and tie in with the release of their autobiography, 30th year as a band, etc.

 

[Aygo]

I really don't get everyones frustration.

1: From the sounds of it the new song will be a single, probably released via Itunes and through stores, most likely the same way Electrical Storm was promoted, a single and on the best of. This is for the existing fan base.

2: Yes its a cash grab for both U2 and Universal, who cares, they are ending a huge world tour so why not end it on a high with a few big xmas releases, dvd/cd/book. Remember after this they will be working on the new album, so there should be some quiet time in the U2 world for a while.

3: This move is aimed purely at getting new fans. Existing fans have option one.

4: The most important thing here is, and I dont know why people are not putting more emphasis on it. What will the new song sound like. It will give us a big indication on what direction the band is taking for the new album. Isn't this worth more discussion than all the complaining.

5: Don't take this all so personally. The band are not trying to disrepect their fans or their credibility as artists. They've done that already with the last two albums [insert sarcasm]

Yeah, you're both right: "I don't like the idea, so I won't buy it". But that doesn't make me dumb, and express my feeling when I need to.
As I said in the other post, I'm one of those who likes all U2 albums and eras, and I don't like it when 2000's bash comes unnecessarily. Yeah, I'm one of those boring users that are always bothering about that, but that doesn't mean that I have to be happy with everything. I never was, and I was always critic about U2 (even being an hardcore fan), why would I stop?
I'll probably but it just because it belongs to a fan collection, but that's not something that will be worth it just because of 2 tracks that I can download in any P2P board.

1) This is not exactily the same thing as when "Sweetest Thing" and "Electrical Storm" were released as compilation promotional singles. The feeling is the same for us, than for the common consumer.
We were hoping for decent and cohesive (and time spaced) compilations. Not the shit that was offered with the "Best Of 1990-2000" and now this thing.

2) Of course it's no more than a cash grab to U2 and Universal. No more than it. If not, what's the other point with another compilation with songs you already have in other two?
A new compilation + a self-biografic book + a DVD of a well known tour (all in the Xmas fall) = millions and millions to the lockcases. What a wasted marketing strategy!
If the objective was to keep the Vertigo Tour flame alive until the next project, why not an EP or (I insist) the HTDAAB outtakes (even if it was released with few promotion... just to make some more cash and to make people talk about U2 again)? Or why not only the book and the DVD?

3) Counting on what I said above, this is no "getting new fans" strategy (only). At mid 40's, the good strategy to reach new audiences would be surprising marketing techniques, that no one is expecting.
U2 always worked like this, that's why U2 fans come and go, constantly.

4) We don't know what new song is in. We have no clue, that's why there's no speculation. Nes only talk about the Skids cover produced with Rubin and that they recorded other 3 songs. Who'll say that the other song will be - or not - just a HTDAAB outtake? "Sweetest Thing" wasn't a new song by the time as single releasement.

5) I believe, however, that it is just contratual obligations, that's why I don't take it too seriously. But if a compilation had to come now, at least it could fill the gaps the other ones left.
I truly believe that with attitudes like this one U2 will loose credibility, not between the common consumer (that doesn't pay much attention to it), but mostly between music lovers and people that are more expert about these things. In this last group, there are many who don't really praize U2, and with this... that'll get worse.

 

[ponkine]

I believe, however, that it is just contratual obligations, that's why I don't take it too seriously. But if a compilation had to come now, at least it could fill the gaps the other ones left.

That's the spirit and that's what the band should think before releasing any "Definitive" best of

 

[coach]

I think people are frustrated because of the past best of (90 - 00) with unbelievbable omissions (the fly , wild horses, please, etc.) and instead putting in there the hands that build america and the reworked pop versions.

So actually my expectations are low, of course I think I wont buy it, unless it has a 2 disc of some sort, but there's no talk about that so.... just the single for me, and the saints single as well of course.

I think they weren't planning on it, but the book, the end of the tour, christmas, sydney dvd, made for an end of the year album release. I fits well with the 30 year aniversary. and the name is gonna be catchy, it might even trick some clueless people into thinking it's not actually a best of .

 

[ponkine]

Re: Re: Re: Re: This new best of scares me. Here's why.

I seriously think this best of is just meant to bring in new fans and tie in with the release of their autobiography, 30th year as a band, etc.

You're right, but why wasting a great chance to make something wonderful for the long time fanbase as well fro their 30th anniversary?

The U2 by U2 book is an excellent idea, but I can't understand the HUGE difference in releasing an awesome book and a totally stupid, disgusting and disposable "Definitive" s*** almost at the same time

The Definitive Best of should be at the same highest quality level than the book and it's clear it will be nowhere near as complete and essential as the book.


I have a doubt my friends: Does anyone know what would have been the content of the U2 by U2 deluxe? I strongly believe they had this idea about "Definitive" best of as part of the deluxe edition packaging ... and then they decided to release the damn CD alone and cancell the book

Maybe that's the story behind this strange need for releasing a s*** "Definitive" Best of filled with stuff from the 2 previous ones

 

[Zoots]

 

[mikal]

i think Brett Favre is retiring after this season.

 

[Catman]

I really don't get everyones frustration.

1: From the sounds of it the new song will be a single, probably released via Itunes and through stores, most likely the same way Electrical Storm was promoted, a single and on the best of. This is for the existing fan base.

2: Yes its a cash grab for both U2 and Universal, who cares, they are ending a huge world tour so why not end it on a high with a few big xmas releases, dvd/cd/book. Remember after this they will be working on the new album, so there should be some quiet time in the U2 world for a while.

3: This move is aimed purely at getting new fans. Existing fans have option one.

4: The most important thing here is, and I dont know why people are not putting more emphasis on it. What will the new song sound like. It will give us a big indication on what direction the
band is taking for the new album. Isn't this worth more
discussion than all the complaining.

5: Don't take this all so personally. The band are not trying to disrepect their fans or their credibility as artists. They've done that already with the last two albums [insert sarcasm]

 

[U2Man]

Who's Brett Favre?

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

why is brett faaaaavra here?

 

[GibsonGirl]

Who's Brett Favre?

 

[mikal]

Who's Brett Favre?

QB for the Green Bay Packers. he's been rumored to have been retiring since the 2000 season, yet he's still playing at a reasonably high level.

 

[guill]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This new best of scares me. Here's why.

You're right, but why wasting a great chance to make something wonderful for the long time fanbase as well fro their 30th anniversary?

Being a member of their long time fanbase, you have all their records, you have all their unreleased stuff, you have all their VHS, you have all their DVD, you have 3000 bootlegs and you really want to tell us that if U2 released a compilation with Acrobat, Twilight and Zooropa, it would be the best day of your life ?
You're going to have a cd with their best songs and U2 by U2, the biggest booklet ever made to go with it, life is good.
And they are in studio to prepare a new record, it's the most beautiful present they can offer to fans

 

[shart1780]

I highly doubt seeing a best of 2000-2010 after this.

 

[Michael Griffiths]

I truly believe that with attitudes like this one U2 will loose credibility, not between the common consumer (that doesn't pay much attention to it), but mostly between music lovers and people that are more expert about these things. In this last group, there are many who don't really praize U2, and with this... that'll get worse.

But that's just it - the people who bash U2 for this aren't actually experts! They don't know why this was released.

People need to understand one thing: U2 now own all their songs in exchange for this deal with Island Records (which was made in the 1990s). They basically think of the 3 Best Ofs as a thank you to Island Records for all their years together (before getting swarmed up by Universal), and for getting complete ownership of their songs. What other band has that kind of artistic control? Rather than selling out, U2's deal would be considered the pinnacle by any band with any sense of artistic integrity.

As for the timing of this release, Island Records have full rights to release a 3rd Best Of whenever they like. That is also part of the contract. It's not actually U2's call, as per agreement. Of course, if Island decides to release the album, I'm sure U2 would support it and help make the release an even better one. Which we still have to wait and see.... Until then, I won't hold any judgement.

 

[Zoocoustic]

Looks like people are finally starting to realize that U2 is in a BUSINESS and in business you make MONEY.

For whatever bizzarre reason, that bothers some of you.

 

[vaz02]

Looks like people are finally starting to realize that U2 is in a BUSINESS and in business you make MONEY.

For whatever bizzarre reason, that bothers some of you.

musicians make music

 

[Michael Griffiths]

musicians make music

And they also make money. Unless they just play for themselves - but then, why release albums at all and why join a band? Wouldn't you want an audience? Or would you want to listen to your album all by yourself, locked up in a room, and play songs to an empty hall? If so, that's fine, but then why be a fan of any band at all? You can't have it both ways.

 

[Utoo]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This new best of scares me. Here's why.

The Definitive Best of should be at the same highest quality level than the book and it's clear it will be nowhere near as complete and essential as the book.

Dude, I think part of your problem is that you keep talking about this as THE "Definitive" collection. Get that word out of your head already. The word "definitive" was mentioned only once---by u2.com of all places, a website that seems to know less about the band than most fans do. And they only used the word to signify that this compilation would consist of songs spanning the band's whole career, as opposed to a single decade.

Your box set idea probably will happen--but many years from now. It's not something that you put out in the middle of your career if you're expecting to make more music down the road. A box set is something you put out once the band hate each other and one member has died.

Quit honestly thinking about this word "definitive" and you just might stop having a seizure every time you post.

 

[Utoo]

And they also make money. Unless they just play for themselves - but then, why release albums at all and why join a band? Wouldn't you want an audience? Or would you want to listen to your album all by yourself, locked up in a room, and play songs to an empty hall? If so, that's fine, but then why be a fan of any band at all? You can't have it both ways.

So true. This is why the notion of "selling out" is bullshit. Every band wants to be big. If you make music for the sole reason of making music, you play in your room or garage. If you play in public, put out albums, etc., you want some glory.

 

[Earnie Shavers]

I highly doubt seeing a best of 2000-2010 after this.

It would only be an EP anyway.

 

[theoriginal]

The problem I have is that this Best Of, Unlike the previous two, will become obsolete. Fast. As soon as U2 puts out a new album, with another hit song, this best of is useless. Then they would have to release another "comprehensive" best of. If at the end of U2's career we have the Best of 1980-1990, the Best of 1990-2000, & the Best of 2000-2010, what use will a best of 1980-2006 be?

 

[Chizip]

The problem I have is that this Best Of, Unlike the previous two, will become obsolete. Fast. As soon as U2 puts out a new album, with another hit song, this best of is useless. Then they would have to release another "comprehensive" best of. If at the end of U2's career we have the Best of 1980-1990, the Best of 1990-2000, & the Best of 2000-2010, what use will a best of 1980-2006 be?

how dare you question one of u2's decisions. this must mean you hate them and their music, never post here again.

 

[Michael Griffiths]

The problem I have is that this Best Of, Unlike the previous two, will become obsolete. Fast. As soon as U2 puts out a new album, with another hit song, this best of is useless. Then they would have to release another "comprehensive" best of. If at the end of U2's career we have the Best of 1980-1990, the Best of 1990-2000, & the Best of 2000-2010, what use will a best of 1980-2006 be?

Yeah, that's true. But I don't think a comprehensive best of (or box set) will be released for a very long time - not until they wind their recording down to practically a hault. That's really the only time for that kind of compilation. Usually bands only release these when they're no longer together.

 

[BigMacPhisto]

They could just release The Best Of 2000-2010 now........

1. Elevation (Tomb Raider Mix)
2. City Of Blinding Lights
3. Sometimes You Can't Make It On Your Own
4. All Because Of You
5. Some New Song #1
6. Miracle Drug
7. Some New Song #2
8. New York
9. Vertigo
10. Kite
11. In A Little While
12. Original Of The Species (Single Mix)
13. Mercy

Hell, excluding OOTS, the song quality is onpar with the other Best Ofs, imo.

 

[BVS]

The reason for the best of is obvious. Bono is missing(more than likely rehab). The short cropped haired guy we see in photos is a doppelganger. It's obvious, haven't you seen those photos where he signs with his left hand? The real reason for the postponed tour is they are trying to get the new guy and the lyp-sync tapes perfected. They tape a new lyp sync track for every show to throw off those who collect bootlegs, you know. So you see, there never will be another U2 album. More than likely they'll come up with some story about how Bono was kidnapped by international terrorist who want to keep Africa poor, and they will replace him with the 4th season of Rockstar.

-Greenslimer-

 

[LemonMelon]

i give up

 

[Aygo]

But that's just it - the people who bash U2 for this aren't actually experts! They don't know why this was released.

People need to understand one thing: U2 now own all their songs in exchange for this deal with Island Records (which was made in the 1990s). They basically think of the 3 Best Ofs as a thank you to Island Records for all their years together (before getting swarmed up by Universal), and for getting complete ownership of their songs. What other band has that kind of artistic control? Rather than selling out, U2's deal would be considered the pinnacle by any band with any sense of artistic integrity.

As for the timing of this release, Island Records have full rights to release a 3rd Best Of whenever they like. That is also part of the contract. It's not actually U2's call, as per agreement. Of course, if Island decides to release the album, I'm sure U2 would support it and help make the release an even better one. Which we still have to wait and see.... Until then, I won't hold any judgement.

You are right! Except that people don't have to understand anything. People are not on U2 boards nor U2 hardcore fans. They just like their music, and sometimes not, only a song or two.

Talking about marketing and image strategy, this is a safe but risky step. Why?
It is positive and safe for those that are just likers of their music, or those that would like to have a "definitive" compilation like this. That fits in their wishes, nobody gets hurt.
But it's not the same between music/culture/showbusiness experts. It's known that between this last group, many don't like U2 because they know till how U2 is a manufactured product. Releasing 3 compilation in 8 years, is a risky and negative step for those that have the power to make U2's image go a bit dark. U2 are in a high position, but nobody is safe. Remember that lately many have been accusing Bono of being a "fat cat" and U2 being cashmakers with expensive ticket tours and i-Pod agreements. This is just another ash in the fire.

 

[U2Man]

since the last best of collection was released, U2 have released 1 album. I repeat 1 album. Sheeesh, this is worse than something Joe Cocker would do.

 

[Utoo]

The reason for the best of is obvious. Bono is missing(more than likely rehab). The short cropped haired guy we see in photos is a doppelganger. It's obvious, haven't you seen those photos where he signs with his left hand? The real reason for the postponed tour is they are trying to get the new guy and the lyp-sync tapes perfected. They tape a new lyp sync track for every show to throw off those who collect bootlegs, you know. So you see, there never will be another U2 album. More than likely they'll come up with some story about how Bono was kidnapped by international terrorist who want to keep Africa poor, and they will replace him with the 4th season of Rockstar.

-Greenslimer-