norah jones: not too late.

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
I really like Norah Jones, despite all the whining that she's "boring", "music for soccer moms" or whatever.

She's wonderfully talented, beautiful, and seems like she doesn't take herself to seriously.

I understand the criticisms about her latest album that some people wish she would stretch a bit and do something a little more adventurous, since she likes to appear onstage with a punk(ish) band from time to time, but hey - she does what she does very well.

I have the new album but haven't listened to it yet. I really, really love her second album.
 
i've listened to the new album once now. i have to say, while i love norah jones too, it has been going downhill since her first album.
 
i think i have snorah jones' first album somewhere on my ipod,
she's definitely quite talented..but suffers from being dull at times, i mean it's the kind of music
that helps me fall asleep. i don't know much about her, but i've always liked her, she seems somewhat genuine.
 
never really understood why her albums keep being considered jazz albums.
 
phanan said:
Her first album robbed Springsteen of a Grammy.

This surprises you? The Grammy voters don't love the rock and roll.

Not like a Grammy actually means anything these days anyway.

And I doubt Springsteen cares all that much. :wink:

Plus, I liked that Norah Jones won a lot of Grammys that year and some new talent was rewarded.
 
coemgen said:
She's a beautiful woman with a beautiful voice

She sure is, I think she's gorgeous :drool: I have her new CD, haven't listened to it yet to say what I think of it.

I saw her on tour years back, it must have been her first real tour after her first CD came out. It was awesome, her voice sounds even better live. I was very skeptical as to how it would sound.

I saw her on 60 Minutes last week and she said she wrote all of the songs on her new CD and there's even a mild sort of "protest" song about Bush on it. She seems so modest and normal, and I find that refreshing. Sure it's not the kind of music I'd want to listen to 24/7, but I like it all the same.
 
I agree, MrsSpringsteen. I saw her in concert in support of her second album and it was actually a pretty good show. I love how down to Earth she is, too. It's, like you said, refreshing.
 
elevation2u said:
he doesn't need anymore
:wink:

While he's had his share of Grammys, he's never won the coveted Album Of The Year. He got screwed in 1984 (Lionel Ritchie, anyone?), and let's face it, The Rising deserved to win a few years back. Nothing against Norah Jones - her music is quite pleasant, and her song won Record and Song Of The Year anyway.

:shrug:



corianderstem said:


This surprises you? The Grammy voters don't love the rock and roll.

Not like a Grammy actually means anything these days anyway.

And I doubt Springsteen cares all that much. :wink:

Plus, I liked that Norah Jones won a lot of Grammys that year and some new talent was rewarded.

It does surprise me - the Grammy voters love U2, after all.

And he cared about that one. In his first show after the Grammys, he opened with "I'd like to thank...absolutely fucking nobody!" :lol:

Ok, I've derailed this thread enough now. :wink:
 
phanan said:
And he cared about that one. In his first show after the Grammys, he opened with "I'd like to thank...absolutely fucking nobody!" :lol:

Did he really? That's awesome. :lol:

In any case, Norah Jones didn't rob him of the Grammy - the voters did. My comment about the Grammys and rock was more intended to point out some of the recent Album of the Year winners: O Brother Where Art Thou soundtrack, Dixie Chicks, Ray Charles, Norah Jones. Not that those aren't great albums (yes, that's debatable, especially in Ray Charles' case), but album of the year seems to go to the non-rockers these days.

So don't be hatin' on Norah! :mad:

:wink:
 
phanan said:


While he's had his share of Grammys, he's never won the coveted Album Of The Year. He got screwed in 1984 (Lionel Ritchie, anyone?), and let's face it, The Rising deserved to win a few years back.

he's definitely been robbed, though personally i don't think Born in the USA is all that great even to Bruce's standards. Born to Run, Darkness, River, Tunnel etc... those really deserved some awards as did the Rising.. but let's face it the Grammys are mostly.. lame. They hardly know talent, even when it hits them in the face.

ok, now I've digressed as well
 
elevation2u said:


he's definitely been robbed, though personally i don't think Born in the USA is all that great even to Bruce's standards. Born to Run, Darkness, River, Tunnel etc... those really deserved some awards as did the Rising.. but let's face it the Grammys are mostly.. lame. They hardly know talent, even when it hits them in the face.

Born In The USA was nominated, though. The others weren't - I know, shocking...

elevation2u said:
ok, now I've digressed as well

:shame:

:wink:


LarryMullen's_POPAngel said:


Bruce :lol: :heart:

Ok, back to the Norah Jones discussion. I couldn't pass up a mini-Bruce derailment.

Who can? :D
 
I enjoy "Come Away With Me" but I don't feel like I need more than one Norah Jones album, :shrug:

She's talented and she's got an undeniably gorgeous voice, but personally I like my singers to have a bit more emotional rawness and drama to their vocals. Which doesn't necessarily mean over-singing or over-emoting; someone like Nick Drake barely ever sings above a whisper but his voice still has so much poignancy and emotion in it. To me Norah sounds too smooth and placid to really grab me in a big way.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom