Pop backlash

[U2STEVE70]

If Pop had ended up to be as huge as AB AND JT, what music direction would have U2 taken?

 

[An Cat Gav]

I think we may not have had to wait so long for the follow up! Also, I'm sure that they wouldn't have felt the need to go back to the "traditional" U2 sound.
I hope that the sucees of the last two albums will encourage the boys and give them confidence enough in their creative powers to go all experimental on us again! Hopefully with Brian Eno twiddling the knobs again!!

 

[catlhere]

Thank The Lord we will never have to find out and can now listen to the delicious current record

 

[BVS]

What if JT hadn't been a sucess, where would U2 be?

 

[J_NP]

If Brian Eno and Dan Lanois hadn't joined u2 and UF hadn't been done , where would U2 and Edge be now ?

 

[Aardvark747]

U2

 

[catlhere]

If The Earth had never been formed, where would U2 be now?

Somehow on Edge's spaceship, imo

 

[doctorwho]

LOL! Silly people.

Silliness aside, it's still a challenge to call "Pop" a failure. It sold 1.5M in the U.S. and about 6-8M worldwide (all depends on which source you read). The tour still drew the most ever for U2.

Nonetheless, after a near decade of experimentation, I know I was ready for a change. How much further could U2 push that industrial, techno, pop sound? If they pushed more, they would pretty much cease being U2!

That said, AB, Zooropa, OS1 and "Pop" all featured some very classic sounding U2 songs. This proves to me that no matter how much U2 experiment, they will still produce songs that sound like the U2 we have known for 25 years. Therefore, even if "Pop" had been a bigger hit, I'm not sure U2 still wouldn't have tried to pull back and re-explore their own sound. This still might have happened.

 

[Pero]

good point

 

[J_NP]

Agree with Pero , great point doctorwho

And for anyone who says Pop sucks or it's a failure , dude your brain is what is failing

 

[LMP]

I think they would've inevitably gone back to a "classic" sound, but with more of a blend w/ their '90s work.

 

[vaz02]

i adore pop even more cos its branded as a failure. Tbh calling it a masterpeice does not do the album justice.

If pop would of been the success equal to Ab and JT i think they would of rushed through a raw rock album tbh.

 

[jacobus]

i disliked POP for nearly 7 years but then i started to rediscover how good this album was. POP imo is the rough diamond in U2s history. i am very frustrated that they u-turned after POP. i hope they can deliver again next time a more brave experimental and more hard-rocking album as their last 2 soft-rock albums.

 

[U2girl]

I think we'd be getting the classic U2 sound anyway, even on Pop it shows they're rounding up the decade of experimenting.

 

[Laurel Hill]

I don't believe they changed directions because of Pop backlash and joking. I think they changed because that's what U2 does, they change. Look even though JT was a HUGE success, they changed with AB. They'd have put out ATYCLB regardless of if Pop was big or not, because that's where they were at that time in their lives.

However, I have read interviews where they admitted they had been running from being U2, and Edge convinced them it was okay to be themselves. They were practicing one day and Edge played a riff and Bono said, 'no that sounds too much like the Edge, too much like U2' and Edge said 'but we ARE U2 and I AM The Edge. What's wrong with that?' It gave them a realization that being what they really were wasn't a bad thing, they didn't have to go out of their way to try to be something else just for the sake of saying 'look at me I'm different!'. Also, in another interview, they told about how a 'DJ saved my life tonight' by pointing out to them that their music was so much better stripped down without all the extra effects and noises they'd been using. And of course Larry and Adam were worried about being 'replaced by a drum machine.' But in the end, U2 changed and changed again, because that's what they do.

 

[Chizip]

I don't believe they changed directions because of Pop backlash and joking. I think they changed because that's what U2 does, they change. Look even though JT was a HUGE success, they changed with AB. They'd have put out ATYCLB regardless of if Pop was big or not, because that's where they were at that time in their lives.

Um, did you forget about Rattle and Hum? That received lots of critical backlash and that's when they decided to change directions with AB. Sure U2 likes to change on their own accord, but to think getting burned by the critics doesn't provide some extra motivation for them to do so is foolish. It happened after Rattle and Hum and it happened after Pop, both would be considered their most radical changes.

They even admitted that with ATYCLB they wanted to get back on the radio to compete with the crappy pop and rap songs that currently dominated it.

So if Pop had been a big success that got a lot of radio play would they have made such a radical change? I'm not so sure, as one of their stated objectives with ATYCLB was to get back on the radio.

 

[phanan]

 

[CKONE]

As my wife always reassures me - size doesnt matter.

POP was exactly what U2 needed when they released it. Whether it sold 10 or 10 million copies was irrelevent. It was a natural progression and was something the music industry desparately needed even if it didnt realise it. U2 got no thanks for it but then R & H was panned by critics (as someone on here pointed out) but when you look back at it it is filled with absolute quality.

With POP it is full of classic U2 but with a different attitude - an almost 'up yours' attitude but the songs still carry the emotion and depth of The Joshua Tree which I consider to be the perfect album.

It is laid out perfectly - something U2 have mastered - the songs are in the right place and just thinking about this album now despite not having listened to it for a couple of years - the hairs on the back of my neck are beginning to stand up.

It sucks you in with Discotheque and you just know the Edge is having a free run! You feel safe in the knowledge that U2 wont let you down and brace yourself for what is to come.....and my god the brace is worth it. Its a rollercoaster from there but its so so smooth and right.

Do You Feel Loved
Mofo
If God Will Send His Angels
Staring At The Sun
Last Night On Earth
Gone
Miami
The Playboy Mansion
If You Wear That Velvet Dress
Please
Wake Up Dead Man

Point out a bad song from that lot I challenge you. I know you cant so save your energy. When you listen to it everything is new yet classic, its fresh, energetic and edgy.

Its everything it should be and more. It was never a failure it was simply misunderstood by those that didnt grasp everything U2 are and everything they exude (sp).

Its a gem, it was needed and it is class!

 

[roy]

As my wife always reassures me - size doesnt matter.

POP was exactly what U2 needed when they released it. Whether it sold 10 or 10 million copies was irrelevent. It was a natural progression and was something the music industry desparately needed even if it didnt realise it. U2 got no thanks for it but then R & H was panned by critics (as someone on here pointed out) but when you look back at it it is filled with absolute quality.

With POP it is full of classic U2 but with a different attitude - an almost 'up yours' attitude but the songs still carry the emotion and depth of The Joshua Tree which I consider to be the perfect album.

It is laid out perfectly - something U2 have mastered - the songs are in the right place and just thinking about this album now despite not having listened to it for a couple of years - the hairs on the back of my neck are beginning to stand up.

It sucks you in with Discotheque and you just know the Edge is having a free run! You feel safe in the knowledge that U2 wont let you down and brace yourself for what is to come.....and my god the brace is worth it. Its a rollercoaster from there but its so so smooth and right.

Do You Feel Loved
Mofo
If God Will Send His Angels
Staring At The Sun
Last Night On Earth
Gone
Miami
The Playboy Mansion
If You Wear That Velvet Dress
Please
Wake Up Dead Man

Point out a bad song from that lot I challenge you. I know you cant so save your energy. When you listen to it everything is new yet classic, its fresh, energetic and edgy.

Er...no.....Seriously Miami & Playboy Mansion are both amongst the worst songs ever recorded by U2 IMO.

 

[vaz02]

Er...no.....Seriously Miami & Playboy Mansion are both amongst the worst songs ever recorded by U2 IMO.

u kidding me ? 2 of the coolest songs u2 have done , both with sexy lyrics and well produced.

 

[babyman]

I think the same direction the band took. All That You Can't Leave Behind and How to Dismantle An Atomic Bomb are ways where the band wanted to arrive, and they're still on this road.

 

[Zoots]

Er...no.....Seriously Miami & Playboy Mansion are both amongst the worst songs ever recorded by U2 IMO.

Except for the awkward first few verses of Playboy Mansion, I see nothing wrong in these songs. One is beautiful and the other is cool & rocking as hell! Actually, the song Kite has bad last few verses so it should balance out. But personally I prefer PM to Kite.

Definitely NOT the 2 worst songs in U2's cannon IMO.

 

[hcbiggs2002]

Agree with Pero , great point doctorwho

And for anyone who says Pop sucks or it's a failure , dude your brain is what is failing

Well said!

 

[doctorwho]

u kidding me ? 2 of the coolest songs u2 have done , both with sexy lyrics and well produced.

Careful - we don't want this to turn into a "Pop" bashing thread or a "this is what I don't like about 'Pop'" thread. There are quite a few "Pop" songs that I just don't care for myself - but I can say that about every U2 album. I'm definitely in the rather small camp that says I don't have to like every U2 song or album. Overall, "Pop" is not really for me - but I do recall enjoying it in 1997 quite a bit. And that's what's key for me - U2 always seem to produce EXACTLY the type of music I'm seeking at a given moment in time. It's as if they are in tune with my thoughts and emotions! In 1987, I was so ready for a JT album - something that contradicted the hair and pop artists of the day. In 1991, I really wanted a more "fun" U2, something that rocked after the more serious nature of JT and R&H. In 1997, I wanted something more experimental and techno. In 2000, I was ready for a more classic sound. It's as if U2 read my mind and then made the best album they could to suit my desires! This is the reason I've remained a fan for so long. Nothing is perfect, but I haven't found an artist yet that suited my musical tastes so well.

As for this thread, I do agree with the earlier post that said U2 were starting to discard a U2 song simply because it sounded like a U2 song! There is a danger in sounding a bit like one's self. There are tons of threads in this forum where people hate the last two albums pretty much for that very reason - U2 sounds like U2! These fans don't feel U2 pushed enough or were daring enough. They felt U2 played it safe, even if that's not true. But a band whose new album sounds like their last album and the album before that does risk stagnation. U2 changing their sound for "The Unforgettable Fire" and again with AB was possibly the best thing they could have done. Chaging again - even if it was a slight regression in some fans' minds - with ATYCLB was again brilliant. Had U2 once more tried to push their sound, they may have outright failed. They may have sounded so far removed from U2 that even these very fans who wanted U2 to experiment hard may have abandoned them. It was always Bono's goal to be one of the best bands in the world - and I think experimenting to the point of alienating just about every fan one has is just too much for U2 to accept. I agree. What's to be gained? To produce music for the token few fans that might love it? Why appease a few and disappoint many? Why not make music that they love and many fans will love? I adore HTDAAB - I like it more than ATYCLB and "Pop" and "Zooropa"! I don't love every song, but I find it a brilliant album. To me, HTDAAB is their third masterpiece, not ATYCLB (and I also have trouble viewing JT as a masterpiece, but that's another discussion).

This returns me to my original point. Even if "Pop" sold 2 or 3M copies, I'm not sure U2 wouldn't have still pulled back. The first three songs on "Pop" are very techno-oriented. But after that, we start hearing some very classic sounding U2 songs. Other than "Miami", the rest of the songs on "Pop" could have easily appeared on many other U2 albums. "Pop" is almost a contradiction - U2 at their most experimental while also at their safest! "Pop" has plenty of signs that U2 were pulling back - and I think this was showcased on ATYCLB. So I would contend that U2 still would have made an album similar to ATYCLB even if "Pop" was a bigger hit.

 

[Miricale_Drug]

I agree with what others have said. Is pop really so experinmental?

Sure, songs like MOFO couldn't appear on any other album without sounding out of place...

remove a lot of that swaggering FX in the background, and doesn't IGWSHA sound a lot like something on the 'b' side of ATYCLB? to me it does.

Staring at the sun could also fit nicely on to ATYCLB.

*Carrying on *

Last night on earth is fundimentally a rock song with a few techno sounds added to it. Is it me or is it similiar in many ways to the studio version of ABOY?

Miami is diffrent to anything ever done by U2 and very much set to this album i think. It explores techno

GONE - Again remove the 747 sound at the start and its a straight foward bloody rock song.

The Playboy Mansion - Lyrically it typifys pop, the excesses of pop as a culture, but musically is it really far removed from something like love is blindness? Could it be fitting on Achtung Baby if the lyrics were changed (ie totaly rewritten)

If you wear that velvet dress - Im going to skip this cause i never listen to it

Please - Again this is a quite standard song it could fit in the 'trying to throw your arms around the world' slot on AB quite nicely. Indeed if that song was on pop we would probably say it shows the electronic influences.

Wake up Dead Man - again remove all the sub-layersand this is a love is blindness-esque song.

Oh well just my thoughts that in summary pop isn't really as far removed as some people seem to think, and a lot of the ideas would fit on other albums with little issue

 

[Windmilllane]

Pop is better than ATYCLB and HTDAAB. Pop was a lot more bold and the songs kick ass and are not "boring". ATYCLB and HTDAAB are too safe and contemporary.

My only criticism of Pop is Staring at the Sun. The lyrics are downright horrible and don't make any sense whatsoever, although the melody and vibe are really great, almost Beatle-esque, IMO.

Other than that,
Discoteque
DYFL
Mofo
TLNOE
Gone
Miami
Playboy Mansion
IYWTVD
Please
WUDM

IGWSHA is a song that is a bit out of place, but really good nonetheless. The video is one of their best ever.

 

[Zoots]

Windmillane, I agree with every syllable in your post!

 

[catlhere]

It's all opinion.
Neither album is better or worse.

Although it would be fairly easy to prove which albums were more successfull and loved, but I think Pop fans would more like to ignore both of those areas

 

[Zoots]

It's all opinion.

No it's teh actual and teh factual imo.

 

[ntalwar]

To add some fuel to the fire:

ATYCLB - Amazon.com Sales Rank: #644 in Music
Pop - Amazon.com Sales Rank: #5,512 in Music