Magnificent delivered to the radio

[Headache in a Suitcase]

so what's the chorus?

is it the "only love..." part, or is it the "magniiiiiificeeeeent..." part?

or is it both?

how many songs do you know start with part of the chorus, after a long intro that is unrelated to the song and sounds nothing like the rest of the song?

look i LIKE magnificent... but it is not a conventional sounding pop song. and that's not a bad thing... but it's not radio friendly. it's u2 friendly.

heck... BAD isn't radio friendly. it's still a great great great song, and it became radio friendly only because of how popular it became along the years. pride is the radio friendly hit off of unforgettable fire. doesn't mean pride is better than bad.

pearl jam's biggest radio hit is last kiss. why? radio friendly. great pop song. pearl jam's best song? not even close.

crazy tonight is by far and away the catchiest, radio friendly pop song on this album. it screams single. that statement right there does not mean that it's the best song on the album, or even that it's better than magnificent.

magnificent would have been a bigger single if they had released crazy tonight first. then the people who aren't already established u2 fans would go out and buy (coughdownloadillegaly) the album, and then they'd get into the other songs, and then when the trippier, weirder (and maybe better) songs get released later on they'd be more recognizable to our ADD society, thus would fare better.

i LOVE cedars of lebanon. absolutely love it. and i think U2 would have been bat shit crazy if they had released cedars as one of the first singles... or as a single, period.

and for your all that you can't leave behind / vertigo comment...

what's easier for a packed arena to belt out... the choruses to beautiful day and vertigo or maaaagniiiiifffieccceeeent?

the damn word magnificent is an awkward word for christ's sake.

 

[GirlsAloudFan]

so what's the chorus?

is it the "only love..." part

The "only love" part is the chorus.

And, I agree...it's not as "big" of a chorus as either BD or Vertigo.

 

[believer75]

that's my point exactly.

first off your statement on magnificent is an opinion. secondly, they already are and what in god's name is wrong with being one of the biggest rock bands in the history of the planet, who can sell out a stadium simply by showing up?

the bigger bang tour was much more innovative than anything U2 has done since Popmart.

i just really want to know... why the hell do so many u2 fans on this board have a problem with the rolling stones?

I don't have a problem with the Stones and I think some of their later stuff is brilliant...Out of Tears, Blinded by Rainbows, Love Is Strong, Saint of Me, Out of Control, Anybody Seen My Baby?, and there are a few others on Voodoo Lounge that I like. People should give them a listen.

 

[U2girl]

People will be singing along live. It's a chorus in the vein of NYD, Pride, I still haven't found... etc it has stadiums written all over it.

 

[mikal]

my problem with the Stones is that i never thought they were all that good, even in their "prime".

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

People will be singing along live. It's a chorus in the vein of NYD, Pride, I still haven't found... etc it has stadiums written all over it.

i think it's bat shit crazy to compare magnificent to new year's day, still haven't found or pride.

look you love the song... that's great. but you have to be willing to admit that at least some of what i'm saying may just be true considering how poorly the song has performed thus far. otherwise...

 

[mikal]

i think it's bat shit crazy to compare magnificent to new year's day, still haven't found or pride.

look you love the song... that's great. but you have to be willing to admit that at least some of what i'm saying may just be true considering how poorly the song has performed thus far. otherwise...

i would agree that it's crazy to compare Magnificent to those songs in terms of how well they performed on radio. with that said, i'd rather listen to Magnificent over Still Haven't Found and Pride any day of the week.

 

[bram]

I easily prefer Magnificent to New Year's Day, Still Haven't, and Pride. And I love all 3 of those songs. I'm usually pretty conservative when it comes to U2's music too (e.g. JT, AB, and UF are my top 3 albums). And I know I'm not even CLOSE to the only hardcore/longtime fan who thinks so. Just check out the recent top songs poll. #6 is no fluke, no matter how shitty it does in the charts. Of the 3 songs above, only Still Haven't did great on US charts anyway.

 

[Aygo]

i think it's bat shit crazy to compare magnificent to new year's day, still haven't found or pride.

look you love the song... that's great. but you have to be willing to admit that at least some of what i'm saying may just be true considering how poorly the song has performed thus far. otherwise...

I think that Magnificent is much better than ISHFWILF or NYD (I'm not a devote fan of these songs) and it's better than Pride too. And now?

 

[clipper699]

I think that Magnificent is much better than ISHFWILF or NYD (I'm not a devote fan of these songs) and it's better than Pride too. And now?

I don't think Headache was comparing the value or quality of the songs (which is better), but rather their accessability: whether they are tangental to the masses.

 

[Florence76]

Why doesn't anyone (american) start a Magnificent radio campaign?
This could help a bit this song in USA.
This song in one of u2'best and deserves to become a hit!

 

[elevated_u2_fan]

does anyone listen to the radio anymore?

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

I don't think Headache was comparing the value or quality of the songs (which is better), but rather their accessability: whether they are tangental to the masses.

at least someone's paying attenion.

 

[HyperU2]

Crazy Tonight would do better. I think most U2 fans hate it because of Will I Am though.

 

[mikal]

at least someone's paying attenion.

i was paying attention.

 

[Irvine511]

Why doesn't anyone (american) start a Magnificent radio campaign?
This could help a bit this song in USA.
This song in one of u2'best and deserves to become a hit!

there are 300m people in the US. the population grows more diverse every single day.

we'll never again see a single artist dominate the charts and popular opinion in the way that it's possible to do in smaller, more homogeneous countries. Beyonce might have more radio hits than U2, but she's nowhere near selling out stadiums. and their album sales appear to be comparable.

radio play is simply a poor judge of collective opinion. i like the "Single Ladies" song, and it had a brilliant video and i wish Beyonce all the success in the world because she's dead-talented, beautiful, and has a preternatural sense of drama. good on her.

i will neither buy her album nor see her in concert.

and judging by U2's enormous ticket sales in the US, lots of people feel this way.

perhaps it's a good thing that U2 may or may not be giving up on the single, or at least it's promotion, and it would certainly be a change in direction from Behind and Bomb. i think the backlash would have been huge had they done, say, a Gap ad to "Get On Your Boots." that might have killed them, even if it would have made "Boots" a huge single. or at least huge-er.

as for the Rolling Stones -- unlike U2, no one really wants to hear the new stuff, whereas people went nuts for COBL, Vertigo, BD, etc. Kite and Sometimes are every bit as moving as anything from 20 years ago. the Stones give a great concert, and their best albums -- Beggers Banquet, Let it Bleed, and especially Sticky Fingers and Exile on Main Street -- are among the best albums ever recorded. but people want to hear those albums. granted, everyone wants to hear "streets," but everybody also wants to hear the new stuff at a U2 show. and that's unique, and that's why people get irritated when you bring up the Stones. and if U2 loses that, then, for me, the "journey" so to speak will be over. i'll always love them and see their concerts, but the feeling of forward momentum will be gone.

it hasn't happened yet.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

yet there is a mass bathroom/beer line exodous when miracle drug comes on, and it was the same for stuck in a moment last year.

unfortunatly that's a simple fact of touring for long established acts, no matter who they are. it's probably why so many acts pigeon hole the new songs into the begining or end of the sets.

 

[corianderstem]

so what's the chorus?

is it the "only love..." part, or is it the "magniiiiiificeeeeent..." part?

or is it both?

I'd say both, as the "magnificent" is the end of the chorus. I think that first "magnificent" is just an intro, and the word itself is not the only thing in the chorus.

If that makes sense.

 

[bram]

at least someone's paying attenion.

But how many U2 songs have "connected with the masses"? Outside of 1987-1991, they have no major hits on the US Billboard hot 100. And given the marketing fiasco of Magnificent, there is no way we can ever know how this song would have done if a) it had been the beneficiary of a serious marketing push and, most importantly, b) if it had been the first single. I believe Magnificent would have done just as well as Beautiful Day if it had been released first. And I think it's just a masses-friendly/radio-friendly as any of the songs you listed as examples. The "only love" chorus is as singable, universal, and catchy as any of their choruses...ever. If Magnificent had been the 4th single on Joshua Tree, does anyone doubt that it would have been a #1?

It's all just conjecture, and due to context and temporal issues it's impossible to accurately compare songs' accessibility.

 

[mikal]

But how many U2 songs have "connected with the masses"? Outside of 1987-1991, they have no major hits on the US Billboard hot 100. And given the marketing fiasco of Magnificent, there is no way we can ever know how this song would have done if a) it had been the beneficiary of a serious marketing push and, most importantly, b) if it had been the first single. I believe Magnificent would have done just as well as Beautiful Day if it had been released first. And I think it's just a masses-friendly/radio-friendly as any of the songs you listed as examples. The "only love" chorus is as singable, universal, and catchy as any of their choruses...ever. If Magnificent had been the 4th single on Joshua Tree, does anyone doubt that it would have been a #1?

It's all just conjecture, and due to context and temporal issues it's impossible to accurately compare songs' accessibility.

you make a great point. and then there's the example of Walk On, which never charted well in America, but because of 9/11, it was widely known across the country.

 

[Irvine511]

yet there is a mass bathroom/beer line exodous when miracle drug comes on, and it was the same for stuck in a moment last year.

for the sake of discussion, could that have been the song or where the song came in the setlist? MD came it around, what, 60 minutes into the first set? probably when the beer is empty, or it needs to be evacuated, and my guess is that if you put a new song there, or a song that isn't "streets," or if you put an obscure oldie, then people would take that point in time to bathroom/beer. not sure -- but you're right, i did notice a slowing of momentum when they played MD. didn't notice that for "Stuck" though. but i love that song so maybe i was blinded by ecstasy.

at least Springsteen does us the favor by letting Patti sing.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

for the sake of discussion, could that have been the song or where the song came in the setlist? MD came it around, what, 60 minutes into the first set? probably when the beer is empty, or it needs to be evacuated, and my guess is that if you put a new song there, or a song that isn't "streets," or if you put an obscure oldie, then people would take that point in time to bathroom/beer. not sure -- but you're right, i did notice a slowing of momentum when they played MD. didn't notice that for "Stuck" though. but i love that song so maybe i was blinded by ecstasy.

at least Springsteen does us the favor by letting Patti sing.

well i meant stuck on elevation, not last year... after a few years goes by it becomes an "oldie" thus people stick around

except for pearl jam... everybody on the floor, i.e. the fan club seats, goes to the bathroom durring evenflow, 'cause it's the only song that they play every show and all the die hards have seen it a kagillion times.

the masses, i.e. the non die hard fans, i.e. the majority of the people in the building, head for the pisser durring new non hit-single songs. it's just a fact of life for acts that have been around the block.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

But how many U2 songs have "connected with the masses"? Outside of 1987-1991, they have no major hits on the US Billboard hot 100. And given the marketing fiasco of Magnificent, there is no way we can ever know how this song would have done if a) it had been the beneficiary of a serious marketing push and, most importantly, b) if it had been the first single. I believe Magnificent would have done just as well as Beautiful Day if it had been released first. And I think it's just a masses-friendly/radio-friendly as any of the songs you listed as examples. The "only love" chorus is as singable, universal, and catchy as any of their choruses...ever. If Magnificent had been the 4th single on Joshua Tree, does anyone doubt that it would have been a #1?

It's all just conjecture, and due to context and temporal issues it's impossible to accurately compare songs' accessibility.

we'll have to disagree. i in no way find magnificent to be as "masses-friendly" as beautiful day.

you're talking about a massive commercial song in terms of staying power... it's still one of their most played songs to this day.

and no, i don't think magnificent was ever a #1 song, especially in today's climate. back in the day where everything they touched turned to gold, maybe it could get that spot based on their overwellming popularity alone... but that is not today.

there is some amazing crap on the radio and on the charts today... but what all of that crap has in common is a catchy hook. absolute dog shit can go to #1 if it has a catchy hook, while a great song can fail to chart if it doesn't. i don't know why some of you can't figure that out.

magnificent is an awkward word to sing as the title. it doesn't flow, as much as you'd like it to. what, was superfluous taken? fabulous? glorious? supercalifragilisticexpialidocious?

this song has left less of a dent than get on your boots... there HAS to be a reason beyond "no marketing push."

if they aren't going to go nuts with the iPod commercials and huge commercial push, then they need to release singles with broad, far reaching mass-commercial appeal.

crazy tonight is that song, breathe is second on the list, maybe even stand up comedy. but crazy tonight is deffinetly that song. it doesn't mean those three are the best songs on the album, it just means they are built more for mass radio success than some of the more obscure songs. unknown caller is a great song... it would be a god awful single release. it would fail before it was even released. your average 12 to 32 year old with a 2 second attention span isn't paying attention to a song like that... as sad as that may be, it's still a fact.

 

[Irvine511]

oh man.

now i'm going to go around singing, "FAB-U-LOUS! FAB-U-LOUS!"

 

[elevated_u2_fan]

I don't know, I guess I must be completely out of touch with mainstream music then because Magnificent screamed hit to me...

 

[mikal]

I don't know, I guess I must be completely out of touch with mainstream music then because Magnificent screamed hit to me...

my thoughts too.

the bottom line is, it's impossible to compare the success, or lack of, that Magnificent has had with the success of U2's biggest hits. the music industry is just so different now. and it's obvious that U2 had no intentions of trying to appeal to the mainstream with this album.

 

[clipper699]

I don't know, I guess I must be completely out of touch with mainstream music then because Magnificent screamed hit to me...

Maybe. But any song that you have to edit and shorten in order to comply with the rigidity of "radio-friendliness" is probably doomed to failure, irrespective of the awesomeness of the song, in this case, the awesomeness followed by more awesomeness of "Magnificent". "Crazy" is pre-packaged pop joy that could be released this second, without further ado. And by the way, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. I for one enjoy a song to which I can sing along, and get tired of the faux-elitism which dictates that any song that attracts all (or most) demographics is mindless rubbish. The Beatles released "I Want To Hold Your Hand", and that song has survived the test of time/criticism.

They should release "Crazy" in the US during the Summer. I think it would build alot of momentum for 360 toward September and October.

 

[elevated_u2_fan]

Haven't U2 always had to make Radio Edits from the begining though?

 

[mikal]

i think U2 should release "Cedars Of Lebanon" as the next single.

 

[super fly guy]

Haven't U2 always had to make Radio Edits from the begining though?

The album version is better than the radio edit,why would people buy an inferior edit when they can have the real thing on the album?!