Shuttlecock XIII - Super Deluxe Edition with T-Shirt

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.
" . For me, I'm not interested in following every move of this band by checking in with this website on a daily basis.

.

See, now I come to this website on a daily basis, but for pretty much the past decade, it has very little to do with following U2's every move (except when something is really going on like a tour or fresh release).
The band have become sloths in the way they work, but I still enjoy coming here because of the folks I've gotten to "know" over the last 15 years.
 
I am 100% not still here for U2. 100% just the jibber-jabber with friends. Laz, LM, iYup et al summed it up well.

I didn't realize people described that album that way, unless by "natural" they just mean it doesn't have gnarly synths and dance beats anywhere in proximity. It's slick and clean pop production is in large part what I like about it, and the one fitting home for Bono's earnest-to-the-point-of-silly lyrics in the past 20 years. There's not a song on that album I don't find pleasurable to listen to for one reason or another.

:up:

I fell asleep at the moment when namkcuR's alt track lists occurred
It was the worst series of posts I'd ever heard

:lol::up:

The contrast with Nick Cave is instructive. Two artists of a similar age and experience level, yet over the last decade Cave has produced three excellent to brilliant albums with the Bad Seeds, two primal side band records, a host of film scores, and probably more stuff I am forgetting. He proves that it is possible to be an energetic, creative artistic force into one's 50s - U2 just doesn't want it.

I was going to bring this up myself. It is so fucking depressing. If they had the attitude of Nick Cave we'd still be getting great music and great shows. Regular updates. And the most ironic part is if they went down that path they would get all the love and respect that they want but will never get on the path that they're on now.
 
One huge reason I don't want U2 to pack it in is that I don't want Interference to fold up because I'd really miss the Cockforce. Seriously. I'd really miss you guys. Not joking here.

S but I still enjoy coming here because of the folks I've gotten to "know" over the last 15 years.

I am 100% not still here for U2. 100% just the jibber-jabber with friends. Laz, LM, iYup et al summed it up well.

:)
 
as i said in the thread last night, it's becoming painfully obvious that u2 is full of, and surrounded by, yes-men who are completely in over their heads in today's music industry. from a business perspective, that was a spectacular failure for them not to use this vehicle to promote anything. surely they could have at least one new song to play for this if they had actually made an effort to work for it, but instead it seems vacationing took priority over their careers. it's clear that nobody inside u2 inc. has any clue how music marketing and promotion works anymore. either that or they really genuinely don't care anymore, despite everything they say to the contrary.

the band is doing all the wrong things and everyone around them is enabling them. it's like they're addicted to doing things the same way again and again and thinking it's going to work this time, and it's very frustrating as someone who's been a fan for more than half of my life.
 
Last edited:
Someone in EYKIW said that the wasted opportunities trend started to rear its ugly head as soon as McGuiness stepped down. Maybe he was more of an ingredient to their success than he is given credit for.
 
absolutely. i think paul knew how to push them to work a little harder.

They keep selling all kinds of tickets to shows, though. Maybe that's whst they care about.

yea, that could be. they may not admit it but it could be that at this point they (consciously or not) just regard new albums as necessary groundwork to allow them to go out and tour, since that's obviously where the big money for musicians is these days.
 
Last edited:
They've weathered 4 decades of a music industry that evolved over time. They're no longer the band they were in their 20s where albums came out yearly or every other year backed by constant touring. I think they call the shots and Guy is just there to make things happen for them vs. he being someone that orders them to finish an album and then tells them to tour. If the album comes out first quarter of 2017 that's definitely the quickest we've gotten a full fledge follow-up album Since Zooropa.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Nick Cave is one man. U2 is four men who have managed to stay friends for 40 years, while still being in a band together, despite living in different places, having families, side projects/interests /passion.

I don't expect them to be prolific in releasing music, and honestly don't even need it at this point. I'm tired of the struggle for relevancy because it prevents them touring, IMO, which is the main thing I wish they'd do more of, and if they WEREN'T supporting an album, maybe they'd be more willing to adopt the mantle and start doing fans pleasing shows, ie varied set lists.

It's time to hang THAT part up. I was selfish for a long time in thinking I didn't want that. That I wanted new music, but if Bruce is anything to go by, if you just let that part go, the relevancy part, you end up MORE prolific.
 
Well, at least they haven't gotten to a point like The Rolling Stones who have only put out 4 albums since 1989. That's 27 years. I use 89 as a reference point because Jagger and Richards were around 46 years of age when Steel Wheels was released.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Why the Stones routinely get trotted into discussions about U2 is beyond me. Unlike U2, the Stones don't make a habit of talking up inventive new albums and distribution methods and insinuating new shit is on the immediate horizon. Furthermore, they seem quite comfortable touring on the back of their tremendous musical legacy, which frankly is considerably more impressive than U2's. The Stones have earned the right to do whatever the hell they want music/touring wise several times over.
 
I don't expect them to be prolific in releasing music, and honestly don't even need it at this point. I'm tired of the struggle for relevancy because it prevents them touring, IMO, which is the main thing I wish they'd do more of, and if they WEREN'T supporting an album, maybe they'd be more willing to adopt the mantle and start doing fans pleasing shows, ie varied set lists.

It's time to hang THAT part up. I was selfish for a long time in thinking I didn't want that. That I wanted new music, but if Bruce is anything to go by, if you just let that part go, the relevancy part, you end up MORE prolific.

:up::up::up::up::up::up:

Bruce is the other one I was gonna bring up. Great post. It's infuriating they can't see what they could be.

I too would much rather they tour more regularly than wait interminable amounts of time for new music that doesn't end up being all that great anyway.
 
Catching up on some youtube vids from last night, they didn't sound too bad at all.


Also Billy Idol sounded great, hope he embarks on a tour when he finishes his Vegas residency.
And Miley Cyrus needs to learn to shut the F up when Steve Stevens is shredding a solo, that's a Bono-esque move right there.
 
Really don't get the righteous indignation over the performance either. People are threatening to leave the board and abandon their fandom when, at the very least, we got to see the band at their most unapologetically political in a long time. That's a great thing.



The rest of the show sucked, but this is awesome. It's getting philistines on youtube pissed off too, which is always a nice bonus.
 
Last edited:
Seriously, that performance of Desire made me think we were in for a classic electrifying set. Following it with Vertigo did nothing to change that. Hell, even Elevation I understood as a decent choice for a festival crowd, but the wheels started coming off then.

I do wish some of the choices after the opening duo (maybe trio) had been different, and that U2 had taken better advantage of the situation. In particular I'm concerned about the obvious questions that have been raised about their interest/work ethic/decisionmaking. But this really wasn't too far from what I expected.
 
I was surprised how outspoken the band is in their anti-Trump stance. Not that I thought they would be supportive of him, but in the last 15 years they (and especially Bono) did not commit themselves to a political candidate. Bono would need their support for his ONE/DATA causes. And probably thought he could find common ground with them, despite not agreeing to their overall political philosophy.
I guess he knows that with a Trump presidency helping those in need together with the US government is a lost cause. Though I (and probably many others) am glad to see this old Bono back.
 
That performance of Desire is saying 'this is what the rest of the set could be like if we weren't terrified of playing anything other than our safest material' which is arguably worse than if they hadn't played it at all.
 
It'd only be more (im)perfect if they'd thrown in a snippet of So You Want To Be A Rock n Roll Star
 
Really don't get the righteous indignation over the performance either. People are threatening to leave the board and abandon their fandom when, at the very least, we got to see the band at their most unapologetically political in a long time. That's a great thing.


So they pissed off the Trump fucktards and the Bernie Butthurt crowd?!?!

That really is a great thing! :up:


Sent from my iPad using U2 Interference
 
Really don't get the righteous indignation over the performance either. People are threatening to leave the board and abandon their fandom when, at the very least, we got to see the band at their most unapologetically political in a long time. That's a great thing.



The rest of the show sucked, but this is awesome. It's getting philistines on youtube pissed off too, which is always a nice bonus.


This isn't even that strong though. First of all, the best versions of Desire feature Adam's bass way the fuck up, which this has a little of. But Bono's passion in this video comes off a little lacklustre to me. It's a long way from Fuck the Revolution.

Still, at least it's something. And more overtly political than any other huge act would probably dare to be.

What do the Trump fans in FYM think of this?
 
People getting this upset over Internet streams of a 45 minute set they basically did as a favor, in front of a crowd of 20-30 somethings is just fantastic.
 
why would the show being "a favour" preclude them from using the opportunity to promote any new music?

i'm less "upset" and more just astounded that with a gift-wrapped meatball floating down the middle of the plate, they didn't even bother taking a swing. i'm not even sure they put in enough effort to get into a batting stance.
 
Last edited:
I still don't get the logic that the show was a favor U2 was doing for the station/conglomerate/whatever the hell iheartradio is. A favor in return for what? It's not like Every Breaking Wave or SfS lit up the airways.
 
I still don't get the logic that the show was a favor U2 was doing for the station/conglomerate/whatever the hell iheartradio is. A favor in return for what? It's not like Every Breaking Wave or SfS lit up the airways.
Definitely did out here. It was clearly being pushed by Clearchannel, appearing on stations it had no business being on *cough*KROQ*cough*


And I'll ask you this: Did any of the other bands during the night use the opportunity to push new material? I'll reiteration, this music festival is a rouse created by Clearchannel to keep people thinking that their app is the biggest thing in music by getting large bands to come play a half-hearted set in an arena for 30-45 minutes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom