david
ONE love, blood, life
I bought the remasters for the remastered version of the album, not for one unheard song on a bonus disc. If you're buying the album for just one unheard song, and then feeling ripped off, then you're just really stupid.
New U2 albums spark fury!
- Thread starter manwiththespinninhead
- 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.
Mr. V
Refugee
i'll say again... who gives a fuck about lyrics?
MissAdamBomb87
The Fly
Well, I personally didn't think Boy was that great until I obtained the re-mastered version. It's amazing. I hear things in it that I simply couldn't before. I for one am grateful for them. I 
the re-masters!
the re-masters!shart1780
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Who the frick wrote that stupid article?
Geez these are a rip off. I mean, a band has NEVER release a remastered version of an old record with improved sound and bonus tracks. U2 is the first!
Please. The ignorance of some people astounds me. Almost EVERY popular band with records that are considered to be classic has released remastered CDs. It's nothing new. Nothing new at all. And I'm an audiophile so I'll never buy an obsolete version of an album. Why would I. And I have a pretty nice headphones, car soundsystem and surround sound in my room so I'd be stupid to buy an obsolete version.
Albums like U218 are much better evidence that U2 are money greedy.
I DO think that they could have packed more onto these discs though. It is proof that U2 are a greedy band. I'm sure they'll be re-releasing these albums twenty years down the road with even more material so they can get an extra few milliom.
Geez these are a rip off. I mean, a band has NEVER release a remastered version of an old record with improved sound and bonus tracks. U2 is the first!
Please. The ignorance of some people astounds me. Almost EVERY popular band with records that are considered to be classic has released remastered CDs. It's nothing new. Nothing new at all. And I'm an audiophile so I'll never buy an obsolete version of an album. Why would I. And I have a pretty nice headphones, car soundsystem and surround sound in my room so I'd be stupid to buy an obsolete version.
Albums like U218 are much better evidence that U2 are money greedy.
I DO think that they could have packed more onto these discs though. It is proof that U2 are a greedy band. I'm sure they'll be re-releasing these albums twenty years down the road with even more material so they can get an extra few milliom.
In spite of both offering little new (especially for long time fans), U218 got blasted, and the remasters didn't even when one of them was a contractual obligation.
Well said!
The single disc versions of the album are a good deal, though. I don't know much about early U2, but, from what I've read on message boards, including atu2.com site runner, lots of folks are disappointed that songs from that era have been left off. There's no reason to do this, with all the extra space, unless U2 wants to make a future cash-in. That's not fair to fans and it's disingenuous for a band that has been financially successful for years. It's not the same as some washed-up act that barely sells new albums anymore. It's greed.
People always use that argument to justify what U2 did. The fact is a responsible band that's not in a tough spot doesn't get itself into that situation. They made that agreement to get millions more. They could have at least put on the single version of "Original of the Species" which is unavailable in stores. I really wanted that.
They signed that deal back in 1998. You expect them to know what would happen in 2006 ?
Every big band releases (more than in a career as long as U2's) one Best of. Switch S. Thing and two more All that... songs for IWF, Gloria and Discotheque and it would at least come close to covering all the albums. (hidden song HMTMKMKM)
Personally I wish they'd wait with these remasters until they stopped actively recording and touring - and the option of being able to buy the extra disc (or DVD in JT remaster's case) separately.
Every big band releases (more than in a career as long as U2's) one Best of. Switch S. Thing and two more All that... songs for IWF, Gloria and Discotheque and it would at least come close to covering all the albums. (hidden song HMTMKMKM)
Personally I wish they'd wait with these remasters until they stopped actively recording and touring - and the option of being able to buy the extra disc (or DVD in JT remaster's case) separately.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Or no other songs exist. Or they exist and U2 never want them to see the light of air.
Responsible bands don't get themselves into contract obligations?
They left a label, so they slapped together an album, at least we got bonus material. Radiohead left a label and we got a generic best of with nothing new.
So people at @atu2.com think that U2 had a significant amount of material left over from that era? Let's see, they put out 3 albums in about 3 years and Bono lost his briefcase with lyrics for October and had to start from scratch. I'm actually surprised any additional new worthwhile song was included at all. It would have been easier for U2 to just release a DVD performance of each period, instead of putting in any new songs in the deluxe version at all. Oh but then there would have been complaints that their shows were too short back then and they might have even repeated a song in the show as they did during their very early tours.
Oh, so as long as something you wanted was on it, then it would have been okay.
Mr. V
Refugee
^Well said, BVS and RR. Very well said.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Yeah, I think that has a lot to do with it.
The_acrobat
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
I actually happen to have on my computer about 20 songs that precede Boy. Some of these songs are crap, but some are quite good, and would be better with a little remastering. I'm surprised more of these songs weren't on the bonus disc. "The Fool", "Street Missions", "Life on the distant planet", "Alone in the light", "False Prophet", "Father is an elephant". They had plenty of decent material for the Boy remasters.
While I think disappointment with the left-off songs is fair, I think the assessment of U2's motivations is not. While U2 is often accused of greed, I find this argument to be quite unconvincing. If you really think that U2 (as in the 4 band members) are thinking of ways to squeeze dollars out of you at every turn, then I feel sorry for you and your view of a band you once found inspiration from. They are rich to the point of moral discomfort already, and they know this. Accusing them of greed is a pathetic way of voicing your own otherwise legitimate disappointments.
On the other hand, U2 are very concerned about their reputation when it comes to music. They are so afraid of releasing anything close to a "crap record". I think the lack of songs was quality control--they don't like putting stuff out that they think is crap. Plain and simple. While many of us are utter completists, they aren't thinking along those lines. They are putting something out that they think is good and that (they think) people want to hear.
On the other hand, U2 are very concerned about their reputation when it comes to music. They are so afraid of releasing anything close to a "crap record". I think the lack of songs was quality control--they don't like putting stuff out that they think is crap. Plain and simple. While many of us are utter completists, they aren't thinking along those lines. They are putting something out that they think is good and that (they think) people want to hear.
Screwtape2
Blue Crack Addict
The problem with the article is that they aren't asking the right people. Remasters of albums are just a part of the industry these days. However, the bonus disc can be called a money grab. If barely anything new is offered than it seems like a ripoff.
The single disc is fine.
The bonus disc is a ripoff.
That should have been what the article was about.
The single disc is fine.
The bonus disc is a ripoff.
That should have been what the article was about.
The other fallacy is this: just because there is a bonus disc involved, doesn't mean it was aimed anywhere near the hardcore fans (as in the fans with every possible demo/live track available). U2 is not hardcore friendly, as they have shown with quotes about front-row fans. And honestly this makes a lot of sense from their perspective. You don't become the biggest band in the world by playing to your base. You have to grow and move out.
The 2nd discs were aimed in between the casual and the hardcore--a much bigger demographic.
Sucks for us, but not for the medium level fan who would have to sit through Life on a Distant Planet.
The 2nd discs were aimed in between the casual and the hardcore--a much bigger demographic.
Sucks for us, but not for the medium level fan who would have to sit through Life on a Distant Planet.
Screwtape2
Blue Crack Addict
You need to have more respect for the U2 fans who think that because U2 has done things that can be interpreted as trying to get more money. These currents thoughts have some footing. Be more respectful to people and actually see where they are coming from. When you do you'll find there is some clear reasons for them to think as they do.
Screwtape2
Blue Crack Addict
Because even casual fans want to buy several mixes of NYD and THBAO for additional money.
Of course I understand why people believe that they are greedy, and I have read single reason why people believe such things. However, the JT deluxe remaster (with DVD) was nearly unanimously decided to be a great release, and NOT a cash grab. Why? Because it had nearly everything everyone wanted on it including the ultimate gold mine--Red Hill Mining video. It's only when there is disappointment in the content included that the cries of greed begin. This is simply a logical fallacy--there are many reasons that can explain why the content is or is not ideal and I think that to accuse other people of greed (without knowing them personally or being able to follow the decision-making process) is the disrespectful thing here. I think I can respect other opinions while also believing these opinions to be lazy and simply reflective of their own personal disappointment with a product.
Because even casual fans want to buy several mixes of NYD and THBAO for additional money.
Indeed, they are probably the only ones who do.
The problem with your post is you are being logical and giving U2 the benefit of the doubt. That's become a problem on this forum.
So I guess my point boils down to this: Isn't it possible that these releases (or any other) are disappointing for reasons OTHER than greed? Isn't it, in fact, likely that this is the case? Do you truly think the Edge is sitting in his studio thinking, "Hmm...I'm worth 400 million dollars...I bet I can make that 405 million by re-releasing October 3 times in the next 50 years, mwaahahahahahhahahah!!!!"
I don't agree with that. Not every fan is a completist and not every long time fan has every single + b-side. I'm more than happy with the bonus discs of JT, Boy and October. War is a bit of a disappoitment though.
Screwtape2
Blue Crack Addict
My problem with giving U2 the benefit of the doubt these days is that I believe their focus these days is in itself greedy. I'll explain. As Bram said, U2 wants to stay the biggest band in the world and in turn focuses on casual fans and trying to appeal to new people. Isn't that greed. Shouldn't the band make music for themselves and let the releases be run according to their artistic vision and their fanbase? U2 releases music based on sales and the ability to get around so that...they may remain the biggest band in the world. Remaining the biggest band in the world means the cash continues to flow and being motivated on that is called what? Greed.
Spot on!
Screwtape2
Blue Crack Addict
They are disappointing for a number of reasons and greed is a big factor. U2's actions have at least opened the possibility that that may be happening. People who believe that can't be dismissed so easily.
This is a great point. The only place where I'd disagree with you is that I really believe that cash flow has nothing to do with it. U2 simply wants to be the biggest and best band in the world. They are extraordinarily ambitious to a (morally questionable) level that does perhaps have too great an influence on the music they are making.
On the other hand, I think U2 is just open and honest about something which many bands feel (i.e. we want to be the best) but simply think it in bad taste to admit to the public.
So you have 20 songs that precede Boy. I thought this was a remastering of the Boy album and material created around that time?
Maybe someday when they have nothing else to rerelease they'll make a money grab and release an album under the name of Feedback.
Perhaps they can't be dismissed, but what about their arguments?
While my Edge quote was a crass attempt at humor, I still think that it brings up a very good point. What, besides the tracks chosen for the discs, link this product (or any of their others) to greed? I'd like to know what the specific arguments are.
Similar threads
