HTDAAB: U2 Rehashing Old Song Ideas?

[jick]

Here are some snippets of the desciptions of all the songs in HTDAAB. Take note that I only included the snippets that point to a possible "rehash" theory. Take note how often lines like "classic U2" or "vintage U2" or "quintessential U2" were used. Take note how every song always seems to fit an "era" of U2 or how it could have belonged to a previous album or how every song is compared to an old U2 classic. It seems the new album is nothing new - U2 isn't breaking any new sonic ground and are playing it safe which is actually a good thing for me. Check these snippets out:

1. VERTIGO
NME: "features a riff from The Edge as big as 'Beautiful Day'"

U2 Interference Interview: "That’s a song that just smells like U2, once you hear the first 10 seconds you are hooked. It's kind of like "Pride" or "Elevation."

Musicweek: "U2 return the glory days of the early 80's ..."

2. MIRACLE DRUG
Q: "The sort of wide-eyed anthem that should by now carry a U2 patent."

Musicweek: " ...guitar sound that is synonymous with the Joshua Tree, while the ending has the rousing drums that first appeared on U2's slight foray into hard rock on Exit. Begins downtempo, but in true U2 fashion, rouses before too long."

3. SOMETIMES YOU CAN'T MAKE IT ON YOUR OWN

NME: "...backed by simple chiming guitar and drums reminiscent of 'Where The Streets Have No Name'..."

Q: Bono on his father's death. As stately and emotive as One.

Uncut: "...like a companion for 'One'..."

Musicweek: "... invokes sounds more familiar on Joshua Tree's Where The Streets Have No Name... "


4. LOVE AND PEACE OR ELSE

Uncut: "... ends with some martial drumming from Larry Mullen..."

Musicweek: "...reminiscent of Mofo on Pop..."


5. CITY OF BLINDING LIGHTS

NME: "... sounds like an updated 'With or Without You' ..."

Q: "...back to the wide-open terrain of The Unforgettable Fire, via a vintage Edge motif..."

BLENDER: "Vintage U2.."

Musicweek: "...sounds as though it is a lost track from 20 years ago that could have appeared on The Unforgettable Fire ..."

6. ALL BECAUSE OF YOU
NME: "'Achtung Baby'-era guitars..."


7. A MAN AND A WOMAN

Musicweek: "... vocals on this sound as though they were recorded in 1983 for War ...sends flashbacks of War's Drowing Man..."


8. CRUMBS FROM YOUR TABLE

Q: " ...Edge breaks out I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For's ringing guitar..."

Uncut: " ...a tyipical mid-tempo U2 riff..."

Musicweek: " ...sounds a little like Mysterious Ways ..."


9. ONE STEP CLOSER

Musicweek: " ...very traditional downtempo, atmospheric classic U2 number"


10. ORIGINAL OF THE SPECIES

NME: " ...builds into an epic ballad which is classic U2."

Musicweek: " ...a love ballad that could have featured on All You Can't Leave Behind."


11. YAHWEH

Q: "...quintessentially U2 - from soaring chorus to a title that co-opts the Hebrew word for God..."

Musicweek: "...huge chiming guitars..."

I see a pattern on how its going so far. With the new songs U2 is being compared to U2. I have read similar track by track previews of POP and they were actually comparing U2 to other artists like Prodigy/Chemical Brothers (Mofo), Oasis (SATS), Chris Isaak (Velvet Dress) - the only comparison I read to older U2 was Do You Feel Loved compared to Real Thing. Fast forward to ATYCLB, In A Little While was compared to motown, New York was likened to Lou Reed. I didn't have magazines that previewed Zooropa but I highly doubt that they'd say that the songs could have easily belonged to a previous album.

The theme of this new album seems simple. Rather than draw from musical influences of the current music that is hot now, U2 are drawing from their past catalogue and from their influences when they were staring out (Ramons, Led Zeppelin). U2 are just trying to be U2 now. They are now reshasing their older song ideas - kinda like getting what made them tick and the Best Of 1980-2000 - and using the same sonic signatures for this new album.

I think U2 are now past the stage of pushing creative limits and experimentation. I think they have already found their limits with POP and Passengers and have already learned and drawn a lot from those experiences. I think U2 are at a stage where they know their career is nearing the end and they want to leave a nice lasting legacy. U2 want to just be U2 for once. Rather than draw from new musical influences (there isn't much to choose from these hip-hop artists and manufactured popstars), U2 have decided to rehash their old song ideas but make it sound fresh for 2004.

I'd take a U2 rehashing their old song ideas over an experimental U2 any day. If ATYCLB was the album that brought back the alienated U2 fans who couldn't digest all the experimentation back into the fold, HTDAAB should be the album that will keep thse fans in the fold and strengthen the fan base. I am very happy and excited to see U2 rehashing old song ideas.

Cheers,

J

 

[Jaxx]

I think this is mostly a case of the writers trying to get their impressions of the song across (often superficial first impressions). Describing music is not easy, so it's often necessary to do it in terms of "sounds like". I don't think it means much, especially considering the fact that the same songs are being described very differently by different people.

 

[Hoodlem]

I think on every U2 album they have used things from the past. They always Sound like U2, even when it's only barely. I think that when a band has been around as long as U2, it is natural to notice these similarities with older songs when first listenning to the new songs. In fact I think we look for them. This album may or may not be progressive (as in completely new ideas) for the band, but that is not what will determine if this album is great or just good. The quality of the songs and the consistency of the album is what will make it a classic or not. If it has the right vibe and takes people to places they like to go, then it will be great, even if it sounds "quintessentially U2".

I like ATYCLB but I don't love it, because it doesn't take me to another place (maybe a couple times) as much as some of there other work.


I don't know if this makes any sense.

 

[Layton]

Jick is on to something here. I think the only legitimate criticism that has a chance to stick to HTDAAB is that it's not forging new musical ground. It's gonna unabashedly play to U2's strengths as opposed to the '90's when they purposely played to their weaknesses. At the end of the day, I feel the high quality of the songs will make that criticism a very minor one. HTDAAB will be U2 taking 25 years of disparate musical strands, collecting them together and making their ultimate stand. I predict that will be the predominat take on this record.

 

[teebee]

Well yes and no.

Common sense tells me that this new album will borrow many ideas from their back catalog. After all, this band has 25 years of albums to its credit.

But I also think it's a little more than that. Music journalists these days couch all of their reviews in which other bands an album sounds like. Almost invariably, a review these days is nothing more than a comparison to other bands the reviewer "hears" in the songs. You can't go three lines into an Interpol review, for example, without hearing about Joy Division, and that trend has become a lot more commonplace these days. Since the most obvious influence on the current U2 sound is the old U2 sound, you'll get a lot of "this song sounds like that old U2 song" commentary.

It's pretty lazy, but you have to remember that there are so many more albums released these days. Critics cannot spend as much time on each album as they used to. Who knows how Lester Bangs would have handled it.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

i think music critics don't know how to describe songs

vertigo sounds nothing like beautiful day... the only song even remotely close to vertigo that u2 have recorded was their cover of "beat on the brat," a ramones tune.

 

[Inner El Guapo]

i think music critics don't know how to describe songs

vertigo sounds nothing like beautiful day... the only song even remotely close to vertigo that u2 have recorded was their cover of "beat on the brat," a ramones tune.

Exactly right.

 

[rivergoat]

Maybe it's just me, but it seems that each reviewer has his/her own favorite U2 era or songs, and is positively comparing the songs of How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb with whatever comes closest in the era they like. Hell, they've such a diversity of opinions of what each song reminds each reviewer of, it's impossible to get any kind of feel for what the song is actually like.

I don't have any problem with this idea (that U2 are drawing more on their own stuff and their influences rather than something more modern) - I haven't heard the album so I can't begin to guess what the songs on it are like. But you disprove your thought with the very words you're trying to support it with. Just look at your first example:

1. VERTIGO
NME: "features a riff from The Edge as big as 'Beautiful Day'"

U2 Interference Interview: "That’s a song that just smells like U2, once you hear the first 10 seconds you are hooked. It's kind of like "Pride" or "Elevation."

Musicweek: "U2 return the glory days of the early 80's ..."

Beautiful Day, Pride, Elevation AND early 80's sound? What do these four elements have in common other than these same four guys recorded all of them? Perhaps your theory shouldn't be U2 rehashing their music, but reinforcing the FEEL of certain songs.

But then again, U2 have always been able to elicit certain feelings, certain mindsets through their presentation and energy. For example, the reason I like 'Acrobat' is that it reminds me off all the U2 albums that have gone before, and I also feel that 'Like a Song...' is an early version of 'Acrobat'. These two songs don't really have much in common - except the certain feeling they create, which may be just in my own head and heart. It is quite possible (probable) that something similar is going on with these reviewers you quote.

I think the mistake is having people who know U2's music so well doing the reviews. Get someone who is not so familiar with them to publish a review, and I'll actually pay attention. They won't be so busy trying to relive their memories and evoke previous feelings.

bah, I'm rambling...

goat

}: )~

 

[jick]

Since the most obvious influence on the current U2 sound is the old U2 sound, you'll get a lot of "this song sounds like that old U2 song" commentary.

Exactly my point. For this new album, U2 are drawing influence from their old sounds as opposed to drawing influece from what was hip in the radio (like during POP where it was junge, trip-hop).

All the previous tracks-by-tracks of previous albums I've read didn't compare U2 to U2 as much as they have with this album. So I think its pretty accurate to say that U2 are rehasing old song ideas for this album - and based on the first single Vertigo which sounds like Boy, October, War - I think all the reviews mentioning U2's rehashing are spot on.

Cheers,

J

 

[Axver]

I think U2 are no longer trying to stop sounding like U2.

 

[starsgoblue]

Perhaps 'fine tune' might be better than 'rehash'....

 

[AquariumDrinker]

Perhaps 'fine tune' might be better than 'rehash'....

"Fine tune" - Much better term. I'm not going to speak for the rest of the album because I haven't heard it, but Vertigo has every component of the trademark U2 sound: ringing guitars, a lyric that's more than meets the eye, big chorus. Yet it seems new and like something they haven't done before.

So maybe they are looking to their earlier work on HTDAAB, but there are ways of doing it while making it seem new and unique. If any band is capable of this, it's U2.

 

[Reggie Thee Dog]

Jick...belated Happy Birthday...OK now onto the thread.

What do you expect? U2 have stopped being embarrased of being U2 and so now they have moved on from deconstructing the U2 "sound" and come back to a home of sorts.

They are not afraid to put in the big, ringing guitar or loud, emotive vocal with a huge chorus (which really never left). What difference does it make if the reviewers now say they sound like "old, classic" U2? Isn't that what most people want (not everyone mind you)? I've followed U2 since 1983 (and I was old enough then to appreciate what they were doing), and I miss the Bono howl and the Edge ringing his guitar to Kingdom Come.

I enjoyed their foray into Industrial and dance experimintation, but I'm also glad they saw the light at the end of the tunnel and walked back towards it.

Long Live U2!!!!

 

[Lisa71]

Until I've actually heard the whole thing it's a bit difficult to answer that question. You can always hear a bit of their past in all their music, afterall they haven't stopped being the same four guys.

 

[iacrobat]

Well, I guess we won't know until we hear it.

Frankly, at this point I really don't care if U2 push the envelope. As long as they write brilliant songs, I am a happy man.

 

[Axver]

I'm starting to have my doubts about this idea of "pushing the envelope," "experimenting," and "going in new directions." Sure, U2 could make the most innovative rap record that completely changes the urban scene forever, but do I want that? Hell no! I would be sorely disappointed. I love U2 because they are U2, and the more of U2 that U2 make, the better. I don't care how innovative they are or are not, as long as they keep making the brilliant music that made me a fan in the first place.

 

[iacrobat]

I'm starting to have my doubts about this idea of "pushing the envelope," "experimenting," and "going in new directions." Sure, U2 could make the most innovative rap record that completely changes the urban scene forever, but do I want that? Hell no! I would be sorely disappointed. I love U2 because they are U2, and the more of U2 that U2 make, the better. I don't care how innovative they are or are not, as long as they keep making the brilliant music that made me a fan in the first place.

 

[jick]

I'm starting to have my doubts about this idea of "pushing the envelope," "experimenting," and "going in new directions." Sure, U2 could make the most innovative rap record that completely changes the urban scene forever, but do I want that? Hell no! I would be sorely disappointed. I love U2 because they are U2, and the more of U2 that U2 make, the better. I don't care how innovative they are or are not, as long as they keep making the brilliant music that made me a fan in the first place.

Amen! Exactly the point of my post. I don't understand why many don't like it if U2 makes safe music.

Cheers,

J

 

[jick]

Frankly, at this point I really don't care if U2 push the envelope. As long as they write brilliant songs, I am a happy man.

I agree. I'd rather have them rehash old tried and tested ideas again and again instead of trying to push the envelope.

Cheers,

J

 

[iacrobat]

Mmm...Jick, thats not exactly what I am saying. I am only saying that I am happy to have U2 sound like U2. I am not interested in hearing them rehash their old songs.

Vertigo does not sound like any other U2 sound, but it does sound like U2.

 

[Sleep Over Jack]

Any band that tries to rehash its old styles is dead creatively...U2 constantly challenging themselves is why they have been a great band for so long.