David Bowie.

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.
I'm not surprised that he's not going to do any live shows, though it would have been nice to at least have one performance. :sad: But yes, I'm pretty sure it's because of that previous heart issue. The new album is better than nothing, no doubt.
 
He tweeted saying Pitchfork made that up, and that he just won't tour this album.

Not surprising at all and to be honest when it was announced I wasn't really even thinking live shows. 66, the heart attack, expectations... he's got nothing to prove.
 
Where are we now, UK no. 6, Bowie's first UK top 10 hit in 20 years, Best Of Bowie re-enters album chart at No. 25.
 
I'm super into "A Better Future" from Heathen, btw. Not sure why that was the song I took away from the album, but I love it. I had it stuck in my head all day after I heard the album.
 
Can we all just talk for a moment about how goddamn good "Heroes" is? The only thing that stops it from being my #1 Bowie album is that the title track aside it's not emotionally gripping, like its predecessor.

But hot damn, if Beauty and the Beast, Joe the Lion, Sons of the Silent Age, Blackout and Secret Life of Arabia aren't five of the best songs ever then I don't know music.

And V-2 Schneider is cool. Plus the three instrumentals are pretty good too, love those tortured horns in Neukoln.

I'M UNDER JAPANESE INFLUENCE AND MY HONOUR'S AT STAKE
 
It was my favorite album of his forever, until too many people told me I wasn't supposed to like it that much and then I started getting too critical of it (because I am an impressionable person). It's still like my 3rd or 4th favorite, it's not like I've disowned it.

I am embarrassed by how much I love "Moss Garden".
 
I really don't care for the second half. I wish I did. The first half is absolutely brilliant, forward-thinking rock that sounds totally unique.

For my money, Low has much better instrumentals, though it's lacking a monster track like Heroes' title track.
 
LemonMelon said:
For my money, Low has much better instrumentals, though it's lacking a monster track like Heroes' title track.

That is a large part of the charm of Low for me - i.e. that it feels like a cluster of sketches that just serendipitously became a brilliant, cohesive album. Nothing about it feels premeditated in terms of looking for radio or commercial success.
 
You are pretty much asking me to choose between my non-existent children when comparing the instrumentals on each album.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom