SOE 18: New Tour, New Despair...

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
No new info or anything, but apparently the Trump factor was a big enough deal to make the political website The Hill. Go figure.

U2 delays album release after Trump win | TheHill

ETA: And Mediaite. Looks like the band might get some attention with this story.

SO Trump isn't even a president and he has ruined an u2 release already... where does this end?

Sent from my SM-G930F using U2 Interference mobile app
 
I usually don't like the views of Pitchfork, but this time, maybe they have a point.

http://pitchfork.com/thepitch/1406-u2-are-finally-acting-their-age/?mbid=social_twitter



Sent from my iPad using U2 Interference
Of course they have a point.

U2 stayed around longer than most bands ever could. That they were able to have a third moment of world domination in their third decade is truly remarkable. But every band faces a tone where that's just not in the cards anymore, and where striving for world domination will make you look out of touch and slightly sad.

That started creeping in in 2009, but it hit full force on this last album promotion cycle. No Line should have been their warning... a massive world tour... the biggest of all time even... but nobody cared about the new music.

Rather than learning their leseon, they double downed and flat out embarrassed themselves with the Songs of Innocence release, not to mention the scrapping of sessions to bring in poppier producers in search of hits hits hits... how they have seemingly forgotten large chunks of their catalog from the pre-2000 "classic U2" era of the band.

I hope this embrace of their past on this tour is part of a move in the right direction. Not that they have to give up writing new music... just that they're going to give up trying to appeal to a younger generation that has passed them by, that they'll be more comfortable in their own skin. That they won't pass by a song that may have a more "classic U2" vibe to it simply because they feel it's too "U2ey." (I mean really?)

They're fucking U2. They don't need to cater to anyone.

The irony upon ironies is that they'll be more likely to find that fourth moment they've been looking for if they stopped trying so hard to force it.

I welcome the era of a grown up U2, comfortable in their own existence, if that is indeed what this is. It's long overdue.
 
i know most people here seem to think they're making up an excuse for not having soe ready, but what we've all heard from several sources over the past few weeks is that it was ready. These weren't the usual bono quotes we're all used to hearing.

I believe the results of the us election had a huge part in what they're doing now. We all know where they stand on political & social issues, and the president-elect steers completely opposite of their core beliefs. It doesn't surprise me that they want to re-work the album a bit, or maybe add a couple tracks to express their concerns about the future of the political landscape.

I'm sure the jt tour is just a way to satisfy live nation & the fans, but there's nothing wrong with that in my book. I read someone's post last night, pointing out they don't even want to hear the first 4 tracks since they've heard them enough already. Seriously? If this were the soe tour, we would likely hear those 4 songs anyway. Now we get to finally hear the rest of the jt album live, including some songs for the first time ever. That is totally worth it for me. Soe will be out in its own time.

I'm sorry if i come across as too quick to accept the album delay news, but the forums were getting a little too negative on a day when we just had a tour announcement.

exactly!
 
Of course they have a point.

U2 stayed around longer than most bands ever could. That they were able to have a third moment of world domination in their third decade is truly remarkable. But every band faces a tone where that's just not in the cards anymore, and where striving for world domination will make you look out of touch and slightly sad.

That started creeping in in 2009, but it hit full force on this last album promotion cycle. No Line should have been their warning... a massive world tour... the biggest of all time even... but nobody cared about the new music.

Rather than learning their leseon, they double downed and flat out embarrassed themselves with the Songs of Innocence release, not to mention the scrapping of sessions to bring in poppier producers in search of hits hits hits... how they have seemingly forgotten large chunks of their catalog from the pre-2000 "classic U2" era of the band.

I hope this embrace of their past on this tour is part of a move in the right direction. Not that they have to give up writing new music... just that they're going to give up trying to appeal to a younger generation that has passed them by, that they'll be more comfortable in their own skin. That they won't pass by a song that may have a more "classic U2" vibe to it simply because they feel it's too "U2ey." (I mean really?)

They're fucking U2. They don't need to cater to anyone.

The irony upon ironies is that they'll be more likely to find that fourth moment they've been looking for if they stopped trying so hard to force it.

I welcome the era of a grown up U2, comfortable in their own existence, if that is indeed what this is. It's long overdue.

Best post on this issue so far!

Sent from my SM-G920I using U2 Interference mobile app
 
Well said. I've had the same thought about a 'fourth moment' for a while now. I can just see them releasing SoE, suffering the same tepid reaction, then going away/semi-retiring for a few years... only to come back with a less commercial, uncompromising album that acknowledges they can no longer play the hit-making game, and that has a positive reaction akin (though not to the same extent) to something like Bowie's Next Day, or Black Star.


Having said all that, I'm only about 50% convinced that their age has prevented their success in recent years. This is because I don't think they've written anything worthy of being a hit since Vertigo. NLOTH was of course a dud, and Miracle nearly got there but doesn't quite 'soar' like Beautiful Day. So, until they write something with the same spirit and potential as their big hits, and it still fails, I'm unconvinced that they're simply too old to find success again.

The Best Thing has a fantastic vibe, and if they release that song and others like it, I think SoE could do miles better than NLOTH or SoI. Maybe I'll be wrong, but i think they have a chance as long as the music's there.
 
Of course they have a point.

U2 stayed around longer than most bands ever could. That they were able to have a third moment of world domination in their third decade is truly remarkable. But every band faces a tone where that's just not in the cards anymore, and where striving for world domination will make you look out of touch and slightly sad.

That started creeping in in 2009, but it hit full force on this last album promotion cycle. No Line should have been their warning... a massive world tour... the biggest of all time even... but nobody cared about the new music.

Rather than learning their leseon, they double downed and flat out embarrassed themselves with the Songs of Innocence release, not to mention the scrapping of sessions to bring in poppier producers in search of hits hits hits... how they have seemingly forgotten large chunks of their catalog from the pre-2000 "classic U2" era of the band.

I hope this embrace of their past on this tour is part of a move in the right direction. Not that they have to give up writing new music... just that they're going to give up trying to appeal to a younger generation that has passed them by, that they'll be more comfortable in their own skin. That they won't pass by a song that may have a more "classic U2" vibe to it simply because they feel it's too "U2ey." (I mean really?)

They're fucking U2. They don't need to cater to anyone.

The irony upon ironies is that they'll be more likely to find that fourth moment they've been looking for if they stopped trying so hard to force it.

I welcome the era of a grown up U2, comfortable in their own existence, if that is indeed what this is. It's long overdue.

read this in Anthony Bourdain's voice. it sounds even better!
 
Headache continues to have the absolute best takes on all of this. Spot on as always.
 
No new info or anything, but apparently the Trump factor was a big enough deal to make the political website The Hill. Go figure.

U2 delays album release after Trump win | TheHill

ETA: And Mediaite. Looks like the band might get some attention with this story.

Friend just texted me that he saw it on CNN. They are definitely taking a lot of liberties with that quote but whatever. We know there were no plans to release it in 2016 on November 7th and nothing about November 8th changed that.

Weird that this is a story honestly. They'll use it as an excuse retroactively I guess. The Twitter responses are...lol
 
Last edited:
ohhhh! clever!

tell us again how you never have to answer to your boss.

Nice red herring response. Don't let facts get in your way.

The band will never ever admit to it and LYV senior management won't ever say it on the record to the press so as not to embarrass the band (whom they really like and have sunk a ton of money into) but they will tell their investors and shareholders. U2 could tour SOE this year or come up with something else, the band chose the later. And it is all about the money.
 
SOE will probably be an over produced monstrosity, perhaps they should bring in Eno and Lanois for the follow up and go out with a bang!

Sent from my SM-J500FN using U2 Interference mobile app
 
Nice red herring response. Don't let facts get in your way.

The band will never ever admit to it and LYV senior management won't ever say it on the record to the press so as not to embarrass the band (whom they really like and have sunk a ton of money into) but they will tell their investors and shareholders. U2 could tour SOE this year or come up with something else, the band chose the later. And it is all about the money.

you realize Live Nation owns the Principle Management / Maverick combo, right? That they benefit financially from each and every thing that U2 does?

So let's assume you're right. They have Songs of Experience completed and ready to go, are happy with it and the version that is sitting in a basement right now will be released later on, with no changes made. And that Live Nation gave them the option of touring this new album, or touring the Joshua Tree, and U2 chose the Joshua Tree because MORE MONEY!!!!

Let's assume that this really is what it's all about.

OK... fine.

So why stop there then? If it's all about making money for the band and Live Nation (nice of you to continue using their stock symbol to drive home that they're a corporation interested in making money... it's a solid touch)... why wouldn't there be a re-re-re-release of Joshua Tree ready to go with this announcement? Where's a single to sell and promote, and to put in commercials and marketing deals, and push to radio?

Because every one of those things would also benefit Live Nation's bottom line, as the parent company of U2's management team.

So if it was a pure money grab... where's the rest?

Yes, U2 will make money off of this. They make money off of everything. They make a lot of money. Live Nation will make money off of this. Also true. They'll make a shit-ton. Nobody is denying that, and yes, one would be naive to say that getting out there and touring and putting some dollars in the bank didn't cross anyone's mind. But what is a tour if not a way for the band to make money? If it wasn't a money maker, they wouldn't tour.

But I don't think for a second that the band is simply holding off on releasing Songs of Experience so that they can cash in on Joshua Tree. If you believe that, fine. Believe that. It doesn't make sense to me - as if they were simply trying to cash in, they wouldn't stop merely at a tour.

If there's a fair critique of the band in this situation, it's that they're again lacking the confidence to just release music that they've been working on for years. If anyone wants to make that argument, I can't argue against it.

But a pure cash grab? It would be a lot more extensive than it is if that were the only reasoning.
 
Again, nice red herring.

SOE was/is apparently not ready and up to what the band wanted. Live Nation didn't care what they toured, just as long as they toured in 2017. Hence they all concocted what we have. Because, you know, money.
 
this also seems to mean that, like Springsteen, we could be seeing U2 tour every 2-3 years for the foreseeable future.

U2 is a cash cow, and this is how they shall be milked henceforth.
 
this also seems to mean that, like Springsteen, we could be seeing U2 tour every 2-3 years for the foreseeable future.

U2 is a cash cow, and this is how they shall be milked henceforth.


I think all bands tour at least 2-3 years now. That is the only place where the cash is for musicians since no one buys music anymore.

Still pleased U2 keeps price at a reasonable level.
 
O4ABtaN.jpg
 
What worries me is that they're gonna bleed the US market so dry for this tour that they're not going to come back next year for the I&E Tour. There's basically just going to be a lot of 2nd/3rd tier cities for the theoretical tour next year. Places like Portland, Columbus, Minneapolis, St. Louis. There is still a good 30+ show leg just based on cities that haven't gotten I&E 2015 or JT 2017. But it'll involve a lot of single night stops.

I'm just afraid SOE and I&E are going to go the way of SOA. If they can't tour the US again, they probably won't start up I&E at all (because they are obsessed with the US). I don't want U2 to become a nostalgia act. I don't know why, for some reason that bothers me. My 2nd favorite band, Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers, are going on a 40th anniversary arena tour this year (even though their 1st album actually came out in 1976, but whatever). No new album, Tom's been working on a collection of unreleased songs from the Wildflowers sessions but that's it. This 40th anniversary tour is clearly only about money, and I didn't bat an eye whatsoever. I happily bought a ticket and can't wait to go.

Why do I hold U2 to such higher standards?
 
Last edited:
What worries me is that they're gonna bleed the US market so dry for this tour that they're not going to come back next year for the I&E Tour. There's basically just going to be a lot of 2nd/3rd tier cities for the theoretical tour next year. Places like Portland, Columbus, Minneapolis, St. Louis. There is still a good 30+ show leg just based on cities that haven't gotten I&E 2015 or JT 2017. But it'll involve a lot of single night stops.

I'm just afraid SOE and I&E are going to go the way of SOA. If they can't tour the US again, they probably won't start up I&E at all (because they are obsessed with the US). I don't want U2 to become a nostalgia act. I don't know why, for some reason that bothers me. My 2nd favorite band, Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers, are going on a 40th anniversary arena tour this year (even though their 1st album actually came out in 1976, but whatever). No new album, Tom's been working on a collection of unreleased songs from the Wildflowers sessions but that's it. This 40th anniversary tour is clearly only about money, and I didn't bat an eye whatsoever. I happily bought a ticket and can't wait to go.

Why do I hold U2 to such higher standards?


How are you different from the Pitchfork writer again?!


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom