theedgeu2
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
What's this "Metal Rock Song"?
Much More New Music Rumors and Such...
- Thread starter Catman
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
- Status
Based on the tour schedule, I think they'll be back in the studio during January 2011 to finish an album. A spring 2011 release date to coincide with the start of the 2nd American leg of the tour would make sense. I certainly don't expect anything before March.
Niceman
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
An album released outside of the 4th quarter is really inconceivable at this point. The only question is this year or next....
popacrobat
Rock n' Roll Doggie FOB
This is pretty logical and goes with Bono saying they have "something big" planned for 2011.
The John Tree
War Child
I'm sorry, but for as much shit as you all gave him, lazarus is right: they're trying as hard as they can to ruin Mercy.
It's been pared down to be a single, and not for the better. The buildup to the chorus ("I'm ripping the stitches...") made the chorus more powerful because Bono dropped down to a lower register before belting out that anthemic chorus of "Love hears when I lie...". This new version just gradually builds to a chorus that doesn't have the same liftoff. It's not just in the vocals; the drums suffer quite a bit too. While the original version had the hi hat come in to create some movement in the song, a sort of "put the car in fifth gear before you take it to sixth" type of thing, now the plodding tom toms just give way to the chorus with no buildup and, instead of taking off, the car stalls. Pardon the car analogy, but I've been listening to a lot of Springsteen. For a perfect example of this, check out the second version. "You love me too much..." and then an awkward pause before an awkward chorus. Doesn't work. Needs the "ripping the stitches" part.
While I like the change in the lyrics (I like the fact that it's now clearly a breakup song instead of some incredibly vague rumination on love), I don't think "You wanna kill me, I wanna die" works as the first line in the chorus. It's too many syllables to create that anthemic vibe that this song so clearly shoots for. "Love hears when I lie" is not a great lyric, but it sounds great when belted out because the pauses between the words create an emphasis. "LOVE. HEARS. WHEN I LIE." is more powerful than "YOUWANNAKILLMEIWANNADIE." There's too much going on in that line. It might work later in the chorus, but for the first line of the chorus, I think it's too much. It makes the chorus sound more like a pre-chorus.
I do like the "because Because BECAUSE..." ending to the chorus. I think that's an improvement over the 2004 version.
I also like the new solo, but I wonder why it has to immediately resolve into the chorus. Why cut the breakdown, the "Hear nothing" part? That was such a beautiful breakdown that enhanced the song's epic quality. The new solo could easily resolve into the section that comes in at 4:14 on the 2004 version. I think the "I hear nothing" part needs new lyrics, so that could be their opportunity to tweak it up a little bit. Also, my favorite part is where the band plays the chorus without Bono singing at 5:15. It's only the chorus section, but without Bono singing it sounds like another Edge solo. It's incredibly epic and incredibly U2-ish and, with Bono coming in 4 bars later, it just ups the song's emotional and sonic peak.
My biggest concern is WHY they chose to edit the song this way. This wasn't a song that needed editing in the arrangement department. If anything, it was only Bono's lyrics that needed tweaking. The guitar, drum, and bass parts were fine. I'm worried that the song was intentionally tweaked in order to be a 4 minute song that would be a hit on the radio, as opposed to a 6:31 song that wouldn't get played on the radio. If that's the way the band is thinking, and I know they love having hits, then I think they've made a grave mistake. This song will never be another Beautiful Day for them, which is what they're chasing after for some reason. Beautiful Day was the perfect U2 anthem, in a way: it was poppy and short enough, but it was complete and its intentions were pure. I love Beautiful Day because it is what it is. I hate this new version of Mercy because it seems like the band is trying to make it something it's not.
Instead of shooting for a new radio single, they should have tried to make another song that, while not being an official single, is loved by hardcore fans and even most casual fans alike, kind of like "Bad" is.
They've said they're still "tweaking" these songs. Well, I hope they tweak this one back to where it belongs.
Also, before you all start in on me, I'm not a U2 basher or a troll. Check my post history, I stick up for this band and their new work quite a bit. I love North Star and EBW (though I'm not nuts about Glastonbury) and I'm even a HTDaAB fan. But this new Mercy is just too much for me to take.
It's been pared down to be a single, and not for the better. The buildup to the chorus ("I'm ripping the stitches...") made the chorus more powerful because Bono dropped down to a lower register before belting out that anthemic chorus of "Love hears when I lie...". This new version just gradually builds to a chorus that doesn't have the same liftoff. It's not just in the vocals; the drums suffer quite a bit too. While the original version had the hi hat come in to create some movement in the song, a sort of "put the car in fifth gear before you take it to sixth" type of thing, now the plodding tom toms just give way to the chorus with no buildup and, instead of taking off, the car stalls. Pardon the car analogy, but I've been listening to a lot of Springsteen. For a perfect example of this, check out the second version. "You love me too much..." and then an awkward pause before an awkward chorus. Doesn't work. Needs the "ripping the stitches" part.
While I like the change in the lyrics (I like the fact that it's now clearly a breakup song instead of some incredibly vague rumination on love), I don't think "You wanna kill me, I wanna die" works as the first line in the chorus. It's too many syllables to create that anthemic vibe that this song so clearly shoots for. "Love hears when I lie" is not a great lyric, but it sounds great when belted out because the pauses between the words create an emphasis. "LOVE. HEARS. WHEN I LIE." is more powerful than "YOUWANNAKILLMEIWANNADIE." There's too much going on in that line. It might work later in the chorus, but for the first line of the chorus, I think it's too much. It makes the chorus sound more like a pre-chorus.
I do like the "because Because BECAUSE..." ending to the chorus. I think that's an improvement over the 2004 version.
I also like the new solo, but I wonder why it has to immediately resolve into the chorus. Why cut the breakdown, the "Hear nothing" part? That was such a beautiful breakdown that enhanced the song's epic quality. The new solo could easily resolve into the section that comes in at 4:14 on the 2004 version. I think the "I hear nothing" part needs new lyrics, so that could be their opportunity to tweak it up a little bit. Also, my favorite part is where the band plays the chorus without Bono singing at 5:15. It's only the chorus section, but without Bono singing it sounds like another Edge solo. It's incredibly epic and incredibly U2-ish and, with Bono coming in 4 bars later, it just ups the song's emotional and sonic peak.
My biggest concern is WHY they chose to edit the song this way. This wasn't a song that needed editing in the arrangement department. If anything, it was only Bono's lyrics that needed tweaking. The guitar, drum, and bass parts were fine. I'm worried that the song was intentionally tweaked in order to be a 4 minute song that would be a hit on the radio, as opposed to a 6:31 song that wouldn't get played on the radio. If that's the way the band is thinking, and I know they love having hits, then I think they've made a grave mistake. This song will never be another Beautiful Day for them, which is what they're chasing after for some reason. Beautiful Day was the perfect U2 anthem, in a way: it was poppy and short enough, but it was complete and its intentions were pure. I love Beautiful Day because it is what it is. I hate this new version of Mercy because it seems like the band is trying to make it something it's not.
Instead of shooting for a new radio single, they should have tried to make another song that, while not being an official single, is loved by hardcore fans and even most casual fans alike, kind of like "Bad" is.
They've said they're still "tweaking" these songs. Well, I hope they tweak this one back to where it belongs.
Also, before you all start in on me, I'm not a U2 basher or a troll. Check my post history, I stick up for this band and their new work quite a bit. I love North Star and EBW (though I'm not nuts about Glastonbury) and I'm even a HTDaAB fan. But this new Mercy is just too much for me to take.
corianderstem
Blue Crack Distributor
Some of us gave laz shit because he was a total jerk in his post, not because he hates the new version.
Looks to me like you expressed how you feel about the new version without referring to people who think otherwise as "pathetic," so you should be good to go.
Looks to me like you expressed how you feel about the new version without referring to people who think otherwise as "pathetic," so you should be good to go.
powerhour24
ONE love, blood, life
From a reliable source i heard that AB Remaster 1st due for release this fall has been pushed back to spring 2011, so i don't think that 2 albums (the AB remaster & the new one) will be released in the same time !!!
dan_smee
ONE love, blood, life
03-07-2010, 08:15 AM
Posted By slimongi
Something new on the horizon!
According to one informed source, U2 is expected to announce within two weeks maximum (may be next Friday!) 2 releases before this summer!
Keep this post in mind!
Much appreciate your efforts in conveying info, don't get me wrong, but perhaps this source isn't particularly reliable....
mama cass
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2004
- Messages
- 6,293
all this talk about cars stalling, awkward pauses and things not working...
but don't you reckon the person who would really feel if something's not right would be B when he's belting his guts out over the music?
maybe they still tinkering, seeing how they can actually perform this thing, finding out which bits work, which bits don't...
i really do love this second version... i was never a great fan of the "ripping the stitches" bit just felt like it got in the way really, and the "hear/fear nothing" too - i don't mind those bits going - there was too much going on, too messy and superfluous almost (but again, i love the 1st version too lol but can see why they might give it a little trim, take it back to the "essential")... just my opinion...
mama cass
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2004
- Messages
- 6,293
mama cass
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2004
- Messages
- 6,293
well, i guess B's injury might have changed a few plans for the summer eh?
Earnie Shavers
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
shart1780
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Well, judging from what stuff we've heard every new song other than EBW would have fit on HTDAAB, unfortunately. I highly doubt that we'll get a bunch of Bomb songs (if we do I'll set my face on fire), but judging from what we've heard (the poppiness of most of the new songs) the new album may not be nearly as ambient or meditative as they were claiming it would be. I also find the changes in Mercy to be a bad sign. They had a classic (or the potential for one) and they cut out some of the best parts to make it a 4 minute pop hit it won't be a hit).
Really, I'd absolutely hate to have another rock and roll album. NLOTH is the best thing they've done in such a long time. There's so much potential there. The very last thing I want is another HTDAAB. I can't like that album no matter how hard I try. If anything U2 should experiment even more.
I doubt they will, though. I'm honestly expecting them to mess the next album up and give us a bunch of pop and rock crap because the lack of NLOTH's popularity scared them, but I'm always pessimistic so we'll see.
Really, I'd absolutely hate to have another rock and roll album. NLOTH is the best thing they've done in such a long time. There's so much potential there. The very last thing I want is another HTDAAB. I can't like that album no matter how hard I try. If anything U2 should experiment even more.
I doubt they will, though. I'm honestly expecting them to mess the next album up and give us a bunch of pop and rock crap because the lack of NLOTH's popularity scared them, but I'm always pessimistic so we'll see.
Registered Dude
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
Rococo, rococo, rococo, rococo
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Can you really call your "source" reliable if it hasn't been right at all yet?
stargift
The Fly
Going back to Mercy for a minute. My biggest complaint is that they took out--"you wanted violins and you got Nero. I also liked the line--We're binary codes a one and a zero. My only hope is that at this point Bono is stumbling and forgetting the lines so some aren't correct anyway. As far as the length it might be that they are afraid of playing it too long for impatient concert goers who aren't familiar with the song. They probably haven't had much time to practice it to know what they are doing yet. I personally hate the because, because, because line. It's like saying baby, baby, baby, Inotherwords, a 4 year old could write those lyrics. The same goes for the killing him part with the perfect match and made for each other garbage. It sounds like something out of the 1950's. Again, I'm hoping at this point Bono doesn't even remember his original lyrics and is just playing around until he has the time to get serious again with this song.
dan_smee
ONE love, blood, life
They def should have left Binary code...Nero couplet in and left out Weedkiller...Murder couplet.
Much better lyric.
Much better lyric.
dan_smee
ONE love, blood, life
And of all the missing 'sections', I miss the 'your heart is aching' bit. Slight change in melody, and a massive emotional part.
call me a crazy and all, but how the hell does that make sense? the tickets are already sold... why would they have to release a new album to plug dates that are already sold out?
unless they plan on adding a slew of new dates, i think it's either in time for christmas, which is getting more and more unlikely, or next christmas... or beyond.
Earnie Shavers
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
Yeah, it will be somewhere in the middle. The 'Songs of Ascent' name may very well live on, but I think it's safe to say that the original concept would likely have been killed a long time ago. Judging by Bono's assessment of No Line, the chances of them following it up with this meditative, ambient, moody, highly thematic, 'pilgrims journey' album have surely got to be about as good as me actually joining U2. But they also did seem to judge HTDAAB quite soberly as well, both as being too much of a disjointed collection of songs, and in their decision to swim a bit further out of the shallows on No Line, perhaps a suggestion that they did possibly think it was a little too... little, or simplistic, creatively.
So I don't think they'll regress quite that far, but I do think for those of us who saw No Line as a bet-hedging foot in both camps, hoping the next album would be an all in leap back into a certain style/attitude, will have to deal with, at best, another in-betweener, at worst, a swing back to a more "00s" oriented album. But I don't think it will be as disjointed or shallow as the Bomb. I think they will make an effort to make it cohesive, and much like No Line, maybe only a quarter of the tracks will be that obvious or overt. A shame, but I for one am pretty much resigned to this being U2 now. There's no point hanging on for another Achtung Baby, it's not going to happen. Just hope for another No Line.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Aren't some of those dates not sold out yet? I think with a year postponement, and the possibility of new dates U2 will have to release something prior to the US dates.
gvox
Ghost of Love
I'm sorry but unless the new album is like earth shatteringly awesome top of the charts multiple Grammy winning material that wins them a significant number of new fans who want to buy tickets, it wouldn't really influence whatever (small?) number of tickets for those US shows that remain unsold. Even then - would it really make a difference? It's not like they're a new act, and the basic format of the tour will be the same ie 3-4 new songs and the rest hits. Probably even less than 3-4 new songs because they'll feel compelled to continue playing NLOTH songs and also the fact is that EBW, NS and probably Mercy will no longer be completely new by that point. The unsold tickets are likely more a product of the state of our economy, not whether or not U2 has enough good music and/or fans to sell out a stadium in that market..
I'm just saying I doubt trying to get greater ticket sales is much of a factor in their decision of whether to try and rush to get a new album out by the US dates, to be honest...there's always going to be a certain - likely significant - percentage of concert goers who went to one show and that's the one show they'll go to for any given tour, irrespective of what songs are out/played when.
I'm just saying I doubt trying to get greater ticket sales is much of a factor in their decision of whether to try and rush to get a new album out by the US dates, to be honest...there's always going to be a certain - likely significant - percentage of concert goers who went to one show and that's the one show they'll go to for any given tour, irrespective of what songs are out/played when.
gvox
Ghost of Love
gvox
Ghost of Love
Some very salient points, and of course your delivery hopefully elicits some decent responses....and I agree with your take on the chorus. I liked the first version's chorus, it didn't really feel forced, it felt like Bono of old kindof just out there winging it. This was an endearing thing about his 80s material imo. "You wanna kill me, and I want to die" would actually be amazing for one of the verses...it actually fits, and singing it in a lower more subtle way to me would pack more of a punch.
Before everyone jumps to criticize what I just said there, take
You want to kill me
And I want to die
and sing that in the second half of one of the verses (assuming he loses some of the cheesy lines in there right now) or even in the bridge..hell, even in the pre-chorus! - flows way better imo!
I'm a huge fan of HTDAAB and NLOTH is also one of my favourite albums but I certainly don't want the next album to sound like any of the 00s albums. Again the purpose of the band during the past decade was certainly to use everything they have learned in the past to create very diversified albums and that's great because cohesiveness is certainly not a better thing than diversity. The meditative music that some of you are highly praising is also certainly not objectively better than the more straightforward rock sound of HTDAAB. But the debate is not only to know what kind of sound U2 should now create. The real "problem" is that this formula of very diversified albums is now getting old and they have to find a new one because that's how they have always managed in the past to stay artistically and commercially relevant. They have to find new approaches in terms of sound and even artistic philosophy because that's what they did with TUF, AB and even ATYCLB which were all very different from their 3 previous albums. So I don't have a clear idea about what I want for the next album but I certainly don't want a HTDAAB 2 or a NLOTH 2, that's for sure.
Earnie Shavers
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
Or it could be cool if the choruses were different, developing. First chorus is the new one (You wanna kill me) second chorus is the old one (Love/Love/Love). Deliver them differently as well, vocally. First chorus subtle, but right in your ear. Second chorus with the full on Bono foghorn. And I also very much agree with - I think it was BVS - who suggested going from verse straight into the chorus the first time around, and then saving the 'love me too much/ripping the stitches' bridge for the lead into the second chorus. Then I'd go with the new small Edge solo, then into a far far shorter version of the 'fear nothing' bridge, then let that guitar shift from Edge in the original shine on it's own, with Bono coming in with the repeat chorus only half way through (versus immediately as per the new version).
Really, a mix of both versions could be brilliant. The old one definitely needed tightening up, but the new one definitely needs expansion. Doing it that way would nail it down a bit in length, which I presume is/was their main goal, while still leaving some of those great structural shifts in there. And by shaking up the lyric and structure like that, the song has a real development, something quite unique.
So, something in the middle. You get a great song, plus we all get to have a group hug in here.
Really, a mix of both versions could be brilliant. The old one definitely needed tightening up, but the new one definitely needs expansion. Doing it that way would nail it down a bit in length, which I presume is/was their main goal, while still leaving some of those great structural shifts in there. And by shaking up the lyric and structure like that, the song has a real development, something quite unique.
So, something in the middle. You get a great song, plus we all get to have a group hug in here.
Aygo
Rock n' Roll Doggie
When an U2 album is not received the way U2 expected, they panic. It happened with Pop and it clearly happened with NLOTH. Now I'm afraid that U2 steps back even more than what happened 10 years ago.
The problem is that U2 thinks that NLOTH failed in a certain way because of the most experimental songs. Wrong! NLOTH failed in that sense because of a wrong strategy, because of the first impact people had (like on Pop) and because NLOTH has two musical worlds in one because as lately, U2 can't decide to compromise with something specific because they're afraid of not selling enough.
I'm afraid that this is what happens next. It's pretty clear that we can forget the original concept of SOA because it'd never win 7 Grammies nor have Top 40 hits in the US. And it really pisses me off because this validates the impression I've been having that, adding the excessive second guessing of the last 10 years, U2 can't make a compromisse with something they really wished artistically, because they think it won't "sell". How can they know it if they don't even try it?
WTF was that radio edit new version of "Mercy" for? "Mercy" wasn't made to be played in radios, even if it's a classc rock song. I do not accept the idea that a rock song has the obligation of following the typical pop structure and having 4 minutes, a short chorus and a guitar solo. It doesn't! And "Mercy" didn't. Nor didn't "Bad". Nor didn't WTSHNN. And these last two were hits and whose albums were awarded, had experiments and were well received!
The problem is that U2 thinks that NLOTH failed in a certain way because of the most experimental songs. Wrong! NLOTH failed in that sense because of a wrong strategy, because of the first impact people had (like on Pop) and because NLOTH has two musical worlds in one because as lately, U2 can't decide to compromise with something specific because they're afraid of not selling enough.
I'm afraid that this is what happens next. It's pretty clear that we can forget the original concept of SOA because it'd never win 7 Grammies nor have Top 40 hits in the US. And it really pisses me off because this validates the impression I've been having that, adding the excessive second guessing of the last 10 years, U2 can't make a compromisse with something they really wished artistically, because they think it won't "sell". How can they know it if they don't even try it?
WTF was that radio edit new version of "Mercy" for? "Mercy" wasn't made to be played in radios, even if it's a classc rock song. I do not accept the idea that a rock song has the obligation of following the typical pop structure and having 4 minutes, a short chorus and a guitar solo. It doesn't! And "Mercy" didn't. Nor didn't "Bad". Nor didn't WTSHNN. And these last two were hits and whose albums were awarded, had experiments and were well received!
- Status
