All Critical Reviews of the New album here

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.
Well Pitchfork told you they were great, so you must agree, I know.

Again, if Pitchfork gave this a horrible review, you would think it was shit.

If there is no melody, Pitchfork will usually love it.



Many of the reviewers are trying to assess U2 as if they are an indie band constrained by a sub-genre as specific a black-metal-shoegaze. Bands like U2 can certainly borrow bits from these genres, but they don't make entire songs and albums in these genres. They are "bigger" than that.

At this point - U2 needs to be evaluated in the same way we would evaluate The Beatles, Rolling Stones, Led Zeppelin...etc. I would bet this current batch of critics would blast "Hey Jude" for being too melodic or "Here Come the Sun" for being too polished.
 
U2 album review; Songs of Innocence reviewed - Chicago Tribune

here you go, another bad one....boy, never thought getting free music would be an "invasion"....so many pissed people out there! ridiculous

He is entitled to say whatever he wants about the quality of the album. But the question regarding Adam's absence it's just ridiculous. Having heard today the album through a pair of Q acoustics speakers, i can say with certainty that this is his best sounding album. Exceptional and thundering bass.
 
He is entitled to say whatever he wants about the quality of the album. But the question regarding Adam's absence it's just ridiculous. Having heard today the album through a pair of Q acoustics speakers, i can say with certainty that this is his best sounding album. Exceptional and thundering bass.

He probably listened to the album on his laptop while he was tweeting...
 
He is entitled to say whatever he wants about the quality of the album. But the question regarding Adam's absence it's just ridiculous. Having heard today the album through a pair of Q acoustics speakers, i can say with certainty that this is his best sounding album. Exceptional and thundering bass.

agreed...what the hell was he listening to?
 
The criticism that the free album was an invasion perpetrated on people without their consent is the most ridiculous BS. People are raped, beaten and assaulted and abused every day. Those are real crimes. A free album is a gift not an assault on someone without their consent. People spouting this nonsense are immature and clueless.

Sent from my SPH-L720T using U2 Interference mobile app
 
In a month it won't be free so no one will care. I'm sure they will complain about something else like ticket prices.


Sent from my iPod touch using U2 Interference
 
Well Pitchfork told you they were great, so you must agree, I know.

Again, if Pitchfork gave this a horrible review, you would think it was shit.

If there is no melody, Pitchfork will usually love it.

This kind of dismissive posting is soooo beyond grating. You have no idea why other people listen to the music they do. To tell someone who extensively listens to experimental/noise rock that they only like an experimental/noise rock album because someone told them to is just, for lack of a better word: Stupid.

U2 album review; Songs of Innocence reviewed - Chicago Tribune

here you go, another bad one....boy, never thought getting free music would be an "invasion"....so many pissed people out there! ridiculous

The funny thing is, I've heard not one single person actually complain about the album in person. I haven't heard them talk about it at all, actually, and I've talked extensively with several people about the Apple Live Event, so...I have a feeling this is just one of many examples of Internet Entitlement getting picked up by news sources, touted around the web and creating a story out of basically nothing.
 
What seems pretty obvious by the pitchfork review is that u2 are definitely not pitchfork's thing. To state for example that ''A few promisingly weird moments, such as the eerily synthetic Beach Boys chant at the start of “California (There Is No End to Love)” or the breathy rhythms of “Raised By Wolves”, are quickly diluted by stock verse/chorus structures'' is to overcome the fact that u2 as a pop-rock band operates explicitly within the verse/chorus structures, since these are the conventions of their genre. They always followed their generic rules -even Pop respects faithfully the verse/chorus structures- and they will always do so. To expect of them a change of attitude, in fact means a change of genre. And that is never going to happen. In fact, the aesthetic criteria set up by u2's genre and by pitchfork's sense of music reception is so divergent that makes their reviews pointless. It would be much more poignant, both for pitchfork but also for u2, if they decided not to review this album (like they did for example for one of the best records of the last five years for me Donald Fagen's Sunken Condos).

so much this

how dare U2 use the traditional verse/chorus structure, next you're gonna tell me their songs have melodies and rhythm?!!? :rolleyes:

I think this quote from The Onion sums it up best:

"If music has any chance of keeping our interest, it's going to have to move beyond the same palatable but predictable notes, meters, melodies, tonalities, atonalities, timbres, and harmonies."

:lol:


awesome review. Anyone who can name-drop Pop and Passengers deserves to be taken seriously. also note the lack of complaining - anything negative they say relates to the actual music, not how it was released or how douchey Bono is.
 
This kind of dismissive posting is soooo beyond grating. You have no idea why other people listen to the music they do. To tell someone who extensively listens to experimental/noise rock that they only like an experimental/noise rock album because someone told them to is just, for lack of a better word: Stupid.


You're right it was dismissive. Not really cool by me. Just got a little frustrated by the consistent defense of everything PF gives a high rating to whether it be noise-rock or Arianna Grande. But to each his/her own.
 
Who cares about critics????

Today's POP MUSIC is horrible.
So all of these critics have nothing to compare U2 to>>>
Who can really stand up next to them???
U2 is a rare band that has stood the test of time>>
So the hell with everyone!! They made this album for US their true fans!!!!
>>> So enjoy this beautiful belated gift they have given us.

I feel like I'm 13 again ! Trying to learn every lyric ,every cue, beat and note.Listening over and over enjoying everything about it.
Pure happiness this is why we love them this is what we've been waiting for.... ENJOY because non-fanatics have no clue nor do they deserve to have an opinion or make any comment about OUR BAND AND OUR MUSIC.

REMEMBER IT'S FOR US>> Not for some JACKASS CRITIC who just listened to a Beyoncé album and then move on to Katie Perry.....give me a break>>>Now I feel better...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom