Yup.So this obsession with crafting the perfect pop song on paper plus their Too Many Cooks indecisiveness on producers and sound is what made the last three albums such frustrating listens, despite the moments of greatness.
Yup.So this obsession with crafting the perfect pop song on paper plus their Too Many Cooks indecisiveness on producers and sound is what made the last three albums such frustrating listens, despite the moments of greatness.
Still think we’re on a similar page. I don’t disagree about commerce driving the creative, more just about what the result ends up being. I see your point about ATYCLB’s return to form was bucking 90s trends and ended up at the beginning of a general 00s return to earnestness and big pop rock anthems. That’s fair. I suppose the issue to me is that maybe it’s an interesting reinvention in regards to the contemporary music landscape, but less so in regards to the rest of their catalogue.But that's where I fully disagree.
In the late 80s big hair bands started dominating, so U2 lost the mullets and became very serious.
In the early 90s grunge was exploding, so U2 shifted to be less serious and have a more industrial sound.
When they started Pop we were leaving grunge and getting very light, pop punk and, like, a post grunge mishmosh of whatever the heck we want to call it. U2 went electronic-lite.
The late 90s and early 2000s was full of a lot of fake, plastic sounding music. Nu metal, boy bands, electronics, etc. U2 returned to a more earnest, classic coke sound.
the early 2000s shift was no less calculated than the early 90s shift. Different styles, but same reasoning.
Mid 2000s was a bit of a double-down. The music industry was in a strange place. But their big shift was to be the first of the major acts to really embrace new media and downloads vs physical albums with the apple deal. They again stayed one step ahead and were as big as ever.
Where it broke was on No Line - where the band set out to do the same thing - morph to stay ahead of the curve. But they got cold feet and stripped out a lot of what would have made No Line stand out.
But at that point they had eclipsed where they were even in the mid 90s and grown to a place where even a bad album couldn't stop a huge tour.
SOI and SOE featured more of the same. They tried to shift by going with a producer with a very unique sound in Danger Mouse, but again got cold feet and watered it down (and tried to double back with apple to disastrous results).
But live they were still as big a draw as there was in the world. Down from the heights of 360, but still a top 2 global touring act.
So they got themselves caught in this space where they were huge and old and past the point where anyone really gave a crap about new music other than hardcore fans - but they couldn't really accept that and kept watering down their releases to appeal to the masses, which doesn't work when you're old.
They want to still be a band that makes new music that matters, which is admirable, but have reached a point where the olds just want the hits and he youngs don't give a shit.
Every major, long running act goes through it. You either accept that you're old and deal, or you deny it and you try to keep on keeping on, which leads to failure.
I would argue that their initial instincts going into No Line and going into the SONGS OF period were correct, but they lost their sack and couldn't follow through because they got too caught up in caring what the youngs thought, and the desire to remain huge with their new releases instead of just accepting who they were.
I'm done rambling now.
I guess my TL: dr is this - I disagree with the idea that they used to let the creative drive he commerce until post 2000.
They ALWAYS let the commerce drive the creative. It just didn't work as well as things went on because they got too old and big.
Here's hoping. Just one more with Eno Lanois before calling it a day.So Eno designing the stage and Danny joining them for WOWY... Is there any hope that this is a sign of their involvement with the next albums in progress? I mean, they did allow the band to put Stand Up Comedy and Boots on an album, so they aren't perfect by any means. But it would be a nice way to round out their final recordings to have them at the helm.
The little bits of collaboration you mention are definitely promising... I don't think there's any guarantee they'll be back, but I wouldn't be shocked if E&L returned in some capacity for Songs of Ascent - even if it was just a minor contribution, like producing one or two songs, or providing 'additional production' beyond what another, primary producer does - especially given SoA began life as a spin-off of studio work with those two to begin with.So Eno designing the stage and Danny joining them for One... Is there any hope that this is a sign of their involvement with the next albums in progress? I mean, they did allow the band to put Stand Up Comedy and Boots on an album, so they aren't perfect by any means. But it would be a nice way to round out their final recordings to have them at the helm.
bookmarkedIf we get an album in 2024, I will get American Soul printed on tape and eat it.
Very interesting. The production team makes sense in the context of Atomic City, but also Edge's appearance on the Lol Tolhurst / Budgie / Jacknife Lee album and Jacknife Lee's involvement with Bono's tour.some tidbits from u2songs' sources, for those who trust: recording in LA with Larry; Lillywhite and Jacknife Lee producing; targeting fall 2024; stadium tour rumblings
I'd love to hear Andy Barlow work with U2 again. Little Things and Book of your Heart were my favourite songs and also (to my ears) the most progressive sounding songs on the last album.But I wonder if it will only be them, or if again, they're finishing music initially produced by someone else (as with Ryan Tedder and Andy Barlow for SoE).
I wonder if that sound also comes from them getting Tom Elmhirst to mix it. I've just listened to Adele's 'Rolling in the Deep' and 'Rumour Has It' (which Elmhirst also mixed) and to my ears, there's a similarity to the sound on Atomic City - especially the drums.Atomic city had some of my favourite production of U2 in years. Rough around the edges, aggressive drums etc. I hope they're able to stick to that sound, and move away from the (imo) sterile, compromised, overburdened sound of SoE.
Seconded.I'd love to hear Andy Barlow work with U2 again. Little Things and Book of your Heart were my favourite songs and also (to my ears) the most progressive sounding songs on the last album.
I wish I could hear it, but to my ears, Atomic City is sterile and polished rock, no major difference from your other run of the mill 'rawk' songs they've thrown at us in the last ten plus years. I think the song itself is insipid but the production ain't much better.I'm intrigued to learn more about who's producing the latest album when it does finally drop.
I had imagined it would be Lillywhite and Flood, based on that team working on Atomic City and helping to finish up SoE.
But I wonder if it will only be them, or if again, they're finishing music initially produced by someone else (as with Ryan Tedder and Andy Barlow for SoE).
Atomic city had some of my favourite production of U2 in years. Rough around the edges, aggressive drums etc. I hope they're able to stick to that sound, and move away from the (imo) sterile, compromised, overburdened sound of SoE.
Not sure Bono’s up to the task, lyrically. He thinks he’s clever but it lands as overwrought. They might be better served embracing the darkness and the murk - more in the Exit / Acrobat vein - if they want the “rock” to be effective.I wish I could hear it, but to my ears, Atomic City is sterile and polished rock, no major difference from your other run of the mill 'rawk' songs they've thrown at us in the last ten plus years. I think the song itself is insipid but the production ain't much better.
In my mind, the big 'f*** off rock album' that Bono described sounds like something produced by Steve Albini. Really quire dirty sounding. Something intensely raw, anything less won't cut the mustard as a rock album. And it would work for U2, at heart they are still a post-punk band that relies on the energy and spirit of performances rather than the polished refinement that they've become used to over the years.
The guy so focused on writing could write in character again.but what "darkness' are they supposed to tap into? the world's pretty fucking dark, so there's that. but on a personal level? what do you want them to do?
That makes sense to me.7 years and no touring because of Larry. At their age, is it possible they are using this time to queue up lots and lots of work so that when they can tour they don’t have to start another 5 year cycle for the next album? They would be 70 or thereabouts by that stage. There have been so many false start albums since 2006, they’d have the material. Just start pushing it out there guys, one massive world tour with a few albums dropped along the way, close out with SOA.
This is the sound of four guys tearing down their million dollar mansions and rebuilding them back, bigger and better.bono also wasn't a billionaire with highly successful adult children when he wrote those songs.
it's harder to go dark and moody when everything's fucking peaches. i think that's why they tried to look backwards on SOI. to allow themselves a chance to be dark without just making it up.
bono's health scare gave some moments... little things and even 13 are pretty dark. i think 13 would be held in a much higher regard if Song for Someone never existed.
but what "darkness' are they supposed to tap into? the world's pretty fucking dark, so there's that. but on a personal level? what do you want them to do? oh, edge, i want you to put the Malibu chapter of the Sierra Club through your amplifier on this one!