Did Bono contradict his 1993 self? Interesting ZooTV quote... - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Lemonade Stand > Lemonade Stand Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 08-13-2006, 04:46 AM   #31
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,443
Local Time: 08:19 AM
The key to any good song in my mind whether it be rock or anything else is that it has to have a good melody to it and the music has to be something that is timeless and unforgetable, outside of the few standout bands from the era nothing in it will be remembered. The reality is with loud staticy guitar and singers with a sub standard range in general, all it gave me was a headache. Open your throat my friends anything that even had a falsetto in it in the early 90s was a no no. Thats why U2 were so against the norm and I think that had to do with their audience just like they said not many bands could get away with it....its very true.
__________________

__________________
Yahweh is offline  
Old 08-13-2006, 04:56 AM   #32
Refugee
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 2,420
Local Time: 08:19 AM
The way I view music is that "textbook" melody or not, what makes a good song is whether or not i "like" it. I don't choose likable songs based on their technical achievements, like "melodies". That's one thing you have to disgard when listening to the grunge era music...and i'll tell u this because i used to despise that era of music just as much as u did back in the day. But now, after opening up my ears, I can enjoy much music from that time. Maybe u'll like a song because of the feeling or rush that it gives u. Maybe it's the rhythm section. Or the noise. Or the lyrics. Or whatever. I don't seek certain ingrediants to a song. I don't listen to a song and say "hey, if there's not a distinctive pop melody in this i won't like it". Instead I say "what will move me". When you stop searching for the things u like, and instead open ureself up for new experiences, u'll discover a whole new world of music.
__________________

__________________
ozeeko is offline  
Old 08-13-2006, 04:57 AM   #33
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 02:19 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Yahweh
The key to any good song in my mind whether it be rock or anything else is that it has to have a good melody to it and the music has to be something that is timeless and unforgetable, outside of the few standout bands from the era nothing in it will be remembered. The reality is with loud staticy guitar and singers with a sub standard range in general, all it gave me was a headache. Open your throat my friends anything that even had a falsetto in it in the early 90s was a no no. Thats why U2 were so against the norm and I think that had to do with their audience just like they said not many bands could get away with it....its very true.
I don't disagree at all that U2 were swimming against the stream back then. In fact, it was their most brave, creative period. They were nothing short of genius back then.

Fast forward to 2006, U2 is playing in a far friendlier field, with much less of a riskier creative bend, they are in fact, more boring than anything that you can say about any so called "grunge" band in 1992, if only for the simple fact that there was a proven success measure and those bands tried to defy it. U2 want to alleviate risks. They want success, relevance, they want to validate their music with sales. It's just a terrible premise, IMO.

It can only lead to compromising the music, how could it not?
__________________
U2DMfan is offline  
Old 08-13-2006, 05:08 AM   #34
Blue Crack Addict
 
Screwtape2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Omaha, Nebraska “With Screwtape on Kettle Drum and Wormwood on Harpsichord!”
Posts: 18,353
Local Time: 03:19 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by ozeeko


How about this, I like The Police, R.E.M. and many grunge bands all the same. Imagine that! Why are the arrangements boring? Why do the lyrics only look good on a peice of paper (have u ever looked at old R.E.M. lyrics on paper without music = talk about reeking of pretension and incoherence). What is your argument? That grunge sucks? Present some backbone to ure argument other than "i like the Police more". I like the Police too!
Hmm...The Police love is great. I love them, too. I would agree with you ozeeko about the arrangements not being boring. Most grunge bands were very boring but some of them were very creative. Take The Smashing Pumpkins for example; they still had the grunge sound when they made Melan Collie And The Infinite Sadness and Adore. Those two albums are by no means boring arrangements. I would also say Pearl Jam had some pretty creative stuff. At the top there was some creative stuff but most of the music at that time wasn't. So Yahweh is half right.

I really want my Police back and my Smashing Pumpkins, too.
__________________
Screwtape2 is offline  
Old 08-13-2006, 05:12 AM   #35
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,443
Local Time: 08:19 AM
All I wonder is this, what if the last 2 albums would have failed in the sales department what would have people here been saying about the band, probably that they were all washed up after Achtung Baby.

U2 may be making music that has the potential to sell more records these days then it did back in 1991, based on the music alone yes, are they doing it consiously probably, but that is only because ATYCLB proved that U2 could still sell records by the bucketload, and I dont think they knew or even dreamed it would have the success it did considering they were 40 or so and by that time many rock stars are washed up.

Do I think the U2 of the last few albums is great music yes they are good songs for sure, because they have the basics of music going for them, very solid melody, good instermentation and aragement if not a tad bit of over production.

Do I think the last few albums are as inovative as POP, Zooropa or Achtung Baby, certainly not but I would rate them higher then any of the albums from the 90s, except for Achtung Baby which is my favourite album U2 has done.

Problem with the music from the early 90s was it was under produced, but thats what many people like about it, personally I don't, and thats why I feel American music was behind Europian rock music in the 90's.
__________________
Yahweh is offline  
Old 08-13-2006, 05:20 AM   #36
Blue Crack Addict
 
Screwtape2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Omaha, Nebraska “With Screwtape on Kettle Drum and Wormwood on Harpsichord!”
Posts: 18,353
Local Time: 03:19 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Yahweh

Problem with the music from the early 90s was it was under produced, but thats what many people like about it, personally I don't, and thats why I feel American music was behind Europian rock music in the 90's.
That's a good point. Nothing from America was at the level of Radiohead, Oasis, The Verve and so on. Maybe since all the innovations in music came from Europe, the press jumped on grunge because it was the newest style from America since the dawn of rock and roll. It wasn't the most creative style but it was a little different.
__________________
Screwtape2 is offline  
Old 08-13-2006, 06:16 AM   #37
ONE
love, blood, life
 
david's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: southern california
Posts: 10,151
Local Time: 12:19 AM
Grunge was just the 70's all over again, a lot of bands trying to sound like Zepplin and Black Sabbath.
__________________
david is online now  
Old 08-13-2006, 12:41 PM   #38
Refugee
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 2,420
Local Time: 08:19 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Screwtape2


That's a good point. Nothing from America was at the level of Radiohead, Oasis, The Verve and so on. Maybe since all the innovations in music came from Europe, the press jumped on grunge because it was the newest style from America since the dawn of rock and roll. It wasn't the most creative style but it was a little different.
I get a big kick out of these broad generalizations. Nothing from the underproduced America was on the level of the polished European genius bands of the time. Have you ever heard Oasis' first album? God-awful production. Or The Verve's "Northern Soul"- overblown crappy production. Radiohead? They didn't even hit their stride til after the grunge era was over, so I don't see how they qualify as a comparison. I could say Radiohead's "OK Computer" has a worse production than Maroon 5's debut. Technically I'd probably be right. But for me it doesn't matter really. I'll take songwriting over production anyday. I just think you're judging Grunge music by its surface- the clothes they wore, the dark outlook, the hard sound, the music production that didn't sound like glossy 80's hair metal. Whatever. Grunge isn't ure bag, and it's not my favorite music either, but there's a lot there to get into if you just give it a chance.
__________________
ozeeko is offline  
Old 08-13-2006, 12:45 PM   #39
Refugee
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 2,420
Local Time: 08:19 AM
I for one think Soundgarden's Superunknown, Pearl Jam's Vitalogy, Alice In Chains' Dirt, STP's Purple, are all stellar productions. They remain otherworldly while still sounding immediate, like they're playing in your living room. I always found that to be pretty cool. It was more about getting a raw, live sound rather than manufactured ear candy.
__________________
ozeeko is offline  
Old 08-13-2006, 12:54 PM   #40
Refugee
 
XHendrix24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 1,496
Local Time: 03:19 AM
The Pixies aren't grunge. And neither are the Smashing Pumpkins.

Carry on.
__________________
XHendrix24 is offline  
Old 08-13-2006, 01:04 PM   #41
Refugee
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 2,420
Local Time: 08:19 AM
What is grunge, really? It's a term that conveniently links all these bands together for marketing and journalistic purposes. It's really a bad thing because most of the bands had little to do with one another, minus the hard edge. (as opposed to the flacid edge) What sucks is that the word grunge itself turns people off. The word also manipulates people into believing shit that ain't true, like for instance- every band out of that "scene" sounded the same.

The Pixies definitely weren't grunge. Neither were Pearl Jam, or Nirvana, or Soundgarden, or Alice In Chains, or NIN, or any of these bands.

Grunge is a shitty, demeaning term.
__________________
ozeeko is offline  
Old 08-13-2006, 03:49 PM   #42
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,443
Local Time: 08:19 AM
Ill be even more demeaning and call it generally boring, whether you want to label it as grunge or alternative it is dull and boring if you listen to it constantly. As I stated before the occasional song now and then isnt bad to listen to but being bombarded with it constantly every day for about oh 4 years...as I think it was worst from early 1991 to late 1994, has turned me off the sound of that "rock" music. Maybe if it was never brought to the mainstream on such an extreme level I wouldnt hate it so much but I dont think it would move me either.

Nirvana has some good songs, Smashing Pumpins have some good songs, Pearl Jam has some good songs, Alice In Chains have some good songs but overall they just dont do it for me. At least not at the level of other music that I would call timeless music.
__________________
Yahweh is offline  
Old 08-13-2006, 04:16 PM   #43
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
CTU2fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 5,366
Local Time: 04:19 AM
I just hate categorizing music...in the early 90's every band that wore flannel and looked grubby got labelled "grunge", so you ended up with a bunch of bands that didn't really sound alike lumped in together. It didn't help that a bunch of them happened to all come from Seattle...shit, Sir Mix-A-Lot was from Seattle too I think, good thing he never put on flannel eh?

I remember a lot of criticism of the bands that came along a bit later than Nirvana, PJ, the Pumpkins etc...in particular, Bush. Bush got ripped across America for copying the American "grunge" sound. It was really ridiculous...I also remember STP taking a lot of criticism for trying to mimic Pearl Jam. I never really saw them that way though. But I think maybe that's what B was getting at, that newer bands like STP, Bush, and Silverchair etc were making the rock scene stale. IMO we're in a much worse state now with a bunch of bands trying to sound like blink 182...and the rap scene has gotten just as bad.
__________________
CTU2fan is online now  
Old 08-13-2006, 06:38 PM   #44
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
MacPhistoPT's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Posts: 3,893
Local Time: 08:19 AM
yeah, the term "Grunge" sucks. Pearl Jam or Alice in Chains sound NOTHING like Nirvana pex...



Yahweh...

Quote:
Grunge is classified by me as white rock boys in a garage with capri pants and plad shirts making music with loud guitar that sounds of nothing but distortion in a bad way, very few listenable notes the guitars sound the same throughout the song....angry shallow lyrics written by mostly mid to upper class white boys that really have nothing to be angered about.
sorry dude, but this is ridiculous. Talking about Pearl Jam, or you just don't like them, or you know nothing about their music. Listen to Ten, Vs, Vitalogy, No Code, Yield, or even the last album, and tell me how songs like Black, Release, Leash, Porch, Unemployable, Inside Job, Faithful, Nothingman, Immortality, Corduroy, Present Tense, In My Tree, In Hiding, ... fit into "loud guitar that sounds of nothing but distortion in a bad way", or "very few listenable notes". Same for Alice in Chains.
__________________
MacPhistoPT is offline  
Old 08-13-2006, 06:43 PM   #45
Blue Crack Addict
 
Screwtape2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Omaha, Nebraska “With Screwtape on Kettle Drum and Wormwood on Harpsichord!”
Posts: 18,353
Local Time: 03:19 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by ozeeko


I get a big kick out of these broad generalizations. Nothing from the underproduced America was on the level of the polished European genius bands of the time. Have you ever heard Oasis' first album? God-awful production. Or The Verve's "Northern Soul"- overblown crappy production. Radiohead? They didn't even hit their stride til after the grunge era was over, so I don't see how they qualify as a comparison.
You misunderstand me. You were talking about 90's music in general and I agreed that that decade couldn't match the music coming out of Europe. I wasn't talking about grunge alone. I would agree with you that the music from the grunge era coming from Europe wasn't that good. It did take a couple years before Radiohead, Oasis and The Verve hit a stride.
__________________

__________________
Screwtape2 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:19 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com