Monster/Pop and beyond...

[BVS]

we'll compromise

i'll go get the beer and you can tell me how good the song was

 

[Zoots]

As for the silly comments regarding U2 pushing some sort of panic button, I'll do you all a favor and not go there. All I'm going to say is that Pop was a max'd out record in thematic terms. A mole can only dig so far into a hole before it either suffocates or comes back up for some sustenance.

You mean to say they did not panic? All evidence points to it! 1. Return to a safe back-to-basics approach in ATYCLB that they knew would sell better than the experimental Pop! 2. Reworking and Remixing of songs from Pop for the best-of by making them sound more like straight-ahead mainstream rock... esp. Gone w/ more keyboards and Please w/ strings. 3. Making HTDAAB, an album with nostalgic 80s guitar work all over the place that they knew would get the biggest audience cos it's the familiar U2 sound that everyone recognizes and loves!

You think Pop was maxed out thematically? Fine!... who wanted them to make a Pop II? I surely didn't. They could've just headed in a totally new direction with ATYCLB and went where they truly wanted to go instead of making what they knew would sell better. It's like the kid in high school who suppresses his/her individualistic opinions just to be popular with everybody.

REM have always made what they wanted to make. Granted... they already have a dwindling fan base and are very close to fading into total obscurity. That's the price you pay if you don't want to compromise artistic integrity for popularity. But honestly, there's gotta be a happy balance between the two!

Lemme make this clear. I don't hate post 2000 U2. I actually like some of the themes covered by ATYCLB and HTDAAB. I just don't understand why the albums have to be so tailor-made for the public. What's wrong with taking some risks, making what you want to make and just throwing it out there? Hey... maybe you'll pull off another Zooropa! Who knows? And if it doesn't work, you go back to the drawing board and work on something else. So now you're not the biggest band in the world... so what? That's the attitude bands like REM and Pearl Jam seem to have. And I think that's attractive.

 

[MrBrau1]

You mean to say they did not panic? All evidence points to it! 1. Return to a safe back-to-basics approach in ATYCLB that they knew would sell better than the experimental Pop! 2. Reworking and Remixing of songs from Pop for the best-of by making them sound more like straight-ahead mainstream rock... esp. Gone w/ more keyboards and Please w/ strings. 3. Making HTDAAB, an album with nostalgic 80s guitar work all over the place that they knew would get the biggest audience cos it's the familiar U2 sound that everyone recognizes and loves!

You think Pop was maxed out thematically? Fine!... who wanted them to make a Pop II? I surely didn't. They could've just headed in a totally new direction with ATYCLB and went where they truly wanted to go instead of making what they knew would sell better. It's like the kid in high school who suppresses his/her individualistic opinions just to be popular with everybody.

REM have always made what they wanted to make. Granted... they already have a dwindling fan base and are very close to fading into total obscurity. That's the price you pay if you don't want to compromise artistic integrity for popularity. But honestly, there's gotta be a happy balance between the two!

Lemme make this clear. I don't hate post 2000 U2. I actually like some of the themes covered by ATYCLB and HTDAAB. I just don't understand why the albums have to be so tailor-made for the public. What's wrong with taking some risks, making what you want to make and just throwing it out there? Hey... maybe you'll pull off another Zooropa! Who knows? And if it doesn't work, you go back to the drawing board and work on something else. So now you're not the biggest band in the world... so what? That's the attitude bands like REM and Pearl Jam seem to have. And I think that's attractive.

It's all about the attitude eh?

U2 were remixing songs from Pop in 1997, not just 2002.

U2 thought Pop was going to sell like hotcakes because it WAS CATERED TO THE CHARTS. Electronic music was going to be the next big thing, and U2 were going to gain from it. Pop was tailor made for what U2 thought was going to happen in 1997-1998. Hardly the "who cares" attitude many think they had. It's false.

So, you've always disliked U2, you just didn't know it.

What's wrong with sounding like yourself? REM and Pearl Jam could take a lesson from U2. REM's last few records are a shell of the great band they used to be. Up? Reveal? Around The Sun? You call that innovative? Trying to be the Beach Boys? or progressive? Drum machines= progressive? How about good? How is ignoring your strengths for 3 albums a positive? How excited were REM fans when Bad Day was released? They loved it, even though it was a 18 year old tune that was a close cousin to "It's The End Of The World."

And have you actually listened to a Pearl Jam record lately? I love them, but they've been making the same record for the past 6 or 7 years. They have NEVER taken anything close to risks U2 have.

 

[indra]

True. But why isn't it popular?

You can buy it used for $.01 on Amazon.
No joke.

Do you really think that good = popular and popular = good?

I think it does sometimes, but certainly not always. Many albums I like best by various artists aren't their most popular, and I find excellent, but not poplular music by many other artists.

And the people selling it for $.01 on Amazon are making money on the shipping.

 

[The OOTS]

Do you really think that good = popular and popular = good?

Maybe. But I don't think that was the case with Monster. That album sold well because it was riding the coattails of Automatic and the grunge scene and it just didn't live up to expectations in the minds of many REM fans...including myself.

 

[blueeyedgirl]

I think people are missing an important point here - taste is an individual thing.

I can't make you like waht I like and vice versa. Just cos something is popular doesn't mean I'm going to automatically like it.

I personally love Monster, I love hearing the first notes of Kenneth when I hear it and I loved the tour, even though they were woefully underehearsed (and I have the bootleg to show it! ). REM have consistently said through the years that they are not interested in being the biggest band in the world, and they know U2 is. That's not a crime.

If U2 feel the need to tailor their music to be popular then I would be disappointed. If they continued to make music to the best of their ability, I won't. I suppose it's wishful thinking to believe it's the latter at this moment.

Is it too much to ask that U2 make music that is full of passion and real and true?

 

[blueeyedgirl]

oops double post

 

[typhoon]

Oh, God, anyone who's ever shopped for used CDs can tell some stories about the endless second-hand copies of Monster they've come across. It's amazing. It's a goddamn cultural phenomenon. Mention it and everyone, no matter where they're from or what kind of music they listen to, nods knowingly. Just look at this thread. Pitchfork even put it as number one one their Most Common Used CDs list a while back. I don't even know why they keep this album in print; it's inconsiderate.

It's not an awful album, though. The songs are there (I even like "Tongue"), it's just an extremely tedious listen because of the relentless distortion. Oh well, it was better than nothing, and at least it wasn't their last album (so we had New Adventures and, depending on how you feel about it, Up to wash the taste out of our mouths).

What it always comes down to is whether the tunes are any good. Some bands can get away with doing the same fucking thing their whole career if they do it well and get slightly better at it from album to album. Some bands have to branch out and experiment. Some bands try to branch out and experiment but really shouldn't. Just figure out whatever you need to do to write some decent songs and fucking do it.

How excited were REM fans when Bad Day was released? They loved it, even though it was a 18 year old tune that was a close cousin to "It's The End Of The World."

Yeah, the best two post-Berry songs are "The Great Beyond" and "Bad Day." Maybe they should stop making albums and just make singles.

 

[U2girl]

You mean to say they did not panic? All evidence points to it! 1. Return to a safe back-to-basics approach in ATYCLB that they knew would sell better than the experimental Pop! 2. Reworking and Remixing of songs from Pop for the best-of by making them sound more like straight-ahead mainstream rock... esp. Gone w/ more keyboards and Please w/ strings. 3. Making HTDAAB, an album with nostalgic 80s guitar work all over the place that they knew would get the biggest audience cos it's the familiar U2 sound that everyone recognizes and loves!

You think Pop was maxed out thematically? Fine!... who wanted them to make a Pop II? I surely didn't. They could've just headed in a totally new direction with ATYCLB and went where they truly wanted to go instead of making what they knew would sell better. It's like the kid in high school who suppresses his/her individualistic opinions just to be popular with everybody.

REM have always made what they wanted to make. Granted... they already have a dwindling fan base and are very close to fading into total obscurity. That's the price you pay if you don't want to compromise artistic integrity for popularity. But honestly, there's gotta be a happy balance between the two!

Lemme make this clear. I don't hate post 2000 U2. I actually like some of the themes covered by ATYCLB and HTDAAB. I just don't understand why the albums have to be so tailor-made for the public. What's wrong with taking some risks, making what you want to make and just throwing it out there? Hey... maybe you'll pull off another Zooropa! Who knows? And if it doesn't work, you go back to the drawing board and work on something else. So now you're not the biggest band in the world... so what? That's the attitude bands like REM and Pearl Jam seem to have. And I think that's attractive.

1. Bono said even towards the end of Popmart it's time for a more direct record now (remember when City of blinding lights comes from?). If they'd made a more experimental album U2 would not be here today. Also what Layton said, U2 had come to the end of the road in a way with Pop.
2. They reworked 3 singles right there when Pop came out (Please). So it would seem the 97/98 U2 had issues with the album.
3. 4 songs. Oh and back during recording of ATYCLB the band would often say to the Edge he sounds like too much "U2" - remember the infamous Beautiful day talk between Bono and Edge?
It's OKAY to sound like yourself, moreso after you've been running away from it for the past 10 years.

Pop, believe it or not, was catering to the young kids more than any other album and hopping on the bandwagon of the supposed new big thing - dance music from Europe. U2 went very, very far to look and sound "hip" - right down to hiring a DJ to produce the album. As for U2 not caring what people think - yes, I guess that's why we got Achtung Baby and ATYCLB.

 

[Cassis]

seems to me like REm makes records and go on tour because they absolutely love it, and U2 (specially bono) does it because of the money and because they want to change the world

slowly but steady REm is taking over U2 for the #1 band in my opinion


this is REM, and this is what they do

 

[bsp77]

slowly but steady REm is taking over U2 for the #1 band in my opinion


this is REM, and this is what they do

What, they make boring albums?

I love all their work with Bill Berry and parts of Up have flashes of brilliance. But Reveal and, especially Around the Sun are too boring. I can at least listen to Reveal but I played Around the Sun for the first time in probably six months last week and I couldn't finish it.

 

[Zoots]

U2 thought Pop was going to sell like hotcakes because it WAS CATERED TO THE CHARTS. Electronic music was going to be the next big thing, and U2 were going to gain from it. Pop was tailor made for what U2 thought was going to happen in 1997-1998. Hardly the "who cares" attitude many think they had. It's false.

Electronic music/techno had been in the mainstream wayyy before 1997. What about all that Eurodance music from 1991, 1992? Besides, Pop doesn't even have any techno or electronika apart from Mofo!!! Discotheque, Do You Feel Loved, Miami, Velvet Dress, Wake Up Dead Man etc. sounded NOTHING like what was out there at the time in the mainstream. I don't think it was tailor made for the charts.

So, you've always disliked U2, you just didn't know it.
What's wrong with sounding like yourself?

What??? I have always loved the various reincarnations of U2 from 1980 to 1997. There is NOTHING wrong in sounding like yourself... but NEWS FLASH: U2 don't sound like themselves on ATYCLB! The album sounds more like a weak attempt by a cover band at recapturing the Classic U2. You see what I'm saying? I'm not just defending the 90s. I'm defending all of it from 80 to 97. I think the album is good but not nearly as great as anything they ever put out upto that point. That said, it's not a crime. I can understand that it's hard to constantly come up with fresh ideas into your 20th year!

And have you actually listened to a Pearl Jam record lately? I love them, but they've been making the same record for the past 6 or 7 years. They have NEVER taken anything close to risks U2 have.

I bought Riot Act and only liked it somewhat. I don't think they're making the same record for the past 7 years though. I've only heard samples of No Code and Binaural but they sound pretty different from Yield or Riot Act. Basically Vedder is doing what he truly wants to do and not giving a fuck about what would sell. You say U2 are taking risks... what, by trying to sound like themselves and recreating the classic sound that they know everyone would like??? Doesn't make sense to me.

 

[corianderstem]

That's my response to REM's The Great Beyond. God, that's such an amazing song.

Off Monster, the only songs I still really like off it are Kenneth, Let Me In and I Took Your Name. The tour was fun, though. I saw two shows and got LOADS of bootlegs on cassette tapes.

That was my introduction to both the magic of the internet, and the fun of bootleg trading.

 

[angelordevil]

I bought Riot Act and only liked it somewhat. I don't think they're making the same record for the past 7 years though. I've only heard samples of No Code and Binaural but they sound pretty different from Yield or Riot Act. Basically Vedder is doing what he truly wants to do and not giving a fuck about what would sell. You say U2 are taking risks... what, by trying to sound like themselves and recreating the classic sound that they know everyone would like??? Doesn't make sense to me.

It's all good, people....embrace the stillness in the air and chill We're talking about three of my favourite bands here, so I'm loath to criticize them too deeply. I love each group in a different way, and they have all taken risks musically in their own time and space. The thing they all have in common is that they are activist bands bent on altering the status quo. The approaches: U2 want the mainstream by the balls, and are willing to make compromises to do so (Superbowl, etc.). They've slyly repackaged themselves as media darlings, with the same conscience, intent, and purpose that was there from the start. The thing I find interesting, however, is how the current incarnation of U2 was probably not as orchestrated as some may think. ATYCLB could haved bombed in 2000, but instead it captured something that resonated with the public, and almost scarily connected with the feelings and events of September, 2001. Where will they go from here? Expect the unexpected....

Pearl Jam: They're late-bloomers, in my opinion, who have gotten better musically with each album. Riot Act is the most punk and political thing they've created. They deliberately retreated from the mainstream at the peak of success to create something more organic. I'm convinced that they hated half of their fan base during the 90's, and now feel much better about their current place and, most importantly, connection with the audience. They sell-out every venue they play, including two dates I'll be attending in my small and humble province next month. I smile when I hear radio spots lately for Pearl Jam contests. In these, you'll only hear snippets from classic hits like Jeremy, Daughter...when the band has reached so far beyond that for the crazy-ass fan like myself.

R.E.M.: New Adventures in Hi-Fi changed my world for a stretch when it first came out. I listened to it non-stop, and it filled the void left from U2's huge downtime after zoo/pop. Unlike Pearl Jam and U2, I believe R.E.M did lose their map and their plan along the way. I think this was a combination of losing their rhythm, literally, with Berry taking off to grow corn, and the weight of that monumental long-term record contract with Warner Brothers. It's a culmination of events that's pushed them off the radar screen for the casual fan, yet they remain very relevant musically.

That's my big three....I'm currently on a Radiohead kick that's just blowing me away...and I'm just at the first three albums It's a pretty experimental /mystical world they live in, to say the least......

 

[Layton]

You mean to say they did not panic? All evidence points to it! 1. Return to a safe back-to-basics approach in ATYCLB that they knew would sell better than the experimental Pop! 2. Reworking and Remixing of songs from Pop for the best-of by making them sound more like straight-ahead mainstream rock... esp. Gone w/ more keyboards and Please w/ strings. 3. Making HTDAAB, an album with nostalgic 80s guitar work all over the place that they knew would get the biggest audience cos it's the familiar U2 sound that everyone recognizes and loves!

No evidence that I know of points to panic. The evidence points to U2 being disappointed in themselves for how they handled the year long recording process of that album. I believe they think they let the bands organic identity splinter to far afield. Do you agree with that?

As for the last 2 albums being labeled by you as safe and sales-minded, I'm not sure what to say. I don't see how they speak to your perspective on the quality of the albums. I don't see where you've ever connected those labels and categorizations to the content of the albums, the vision of that content and the delivery of the aforementioned content and vision.

As for HTDAAB being full of nostalgic sounds, I think the sound of HTDAAB just IS. U2 are trying to just BE, on this album. In other words, stand as you ARE. There's a strong philosophical idea at the root of the 3 words, I capitalized. In their purest form, their representations are irrespective of past or future. They do and exist fully in the NOW. That is a perfect match for the thematic content of HTDAAB.

 

[Cassis]

What, they make boring albums?

I love all their work with Bill Berry and parts of Up have flashes of brilliance. But Reveal and, especially Around the Sun are too boring. I can at least listen to Reveal but I played Around the Sun for the first time in probably six months last week and I couldn't finish it.

maybe they are to you, but in my opinion REM is the master of bands in setting moods in htier records, and i think thats brilliant. as said before in this thread, they dont want to be the biggest band, they want to have fun.
reveal is all but boring really, it has so many sounds and an awesome atmosphere.
around the sun isnt that good, i must agree.

 

[bsp77]

maybe they are to you, but in my opinion REM is the master of bands in setting moods in htier records, and i think thats brilliant. as said before in this thread, they dont want to be the biggest band, they want to have fun.
reveal is all but boring really, it has so many sounds and an awesome atmosphere.
around the sun isnt that good, i must agree.

We actually agree except for Reveal. I like Reveal compared to most albums by many other bands, I just feel it is weak for REM. It is the second half of that album that bores me somewhat (Saturn Returns, Beat a Drum, Summer Turns to High, Ring and the Chorus, Beachball). Still, it is riveting stuff compared to Around the Sun.

I think I may have been a little too harsh in my earlier post. I can see strong arguments of why REM was better in the 80s and 90s (although I still give the edge to U2). But over the last several years, I feel that REM has gotten so weak that U2 almost wins by default. Although I saw REM in concert last November as part of the Vote for Change tour. Still excellent even though it was an abbreviated concert (12 songs).

 

[Cassis]

i really like the dreamy mood on reveal

i think we'd better not drag this into a matter of taste now

 

[angelordevil]

i really like the dreamy mood on reveal

it is dreamy...i like it a lot

 

[Cassis]

i want to state too, that i can heardly listen to ATYCLB, and that i dont like Around the sun, but i can listen to that whole album