Next Album Rumours Thread IV - 2 Sing 2 Furious

[DeVaul]

Yea, it's exhausting. I've come to expect U2 bashing, but that article is just unnecessary. Kind of what I was alluding to a few pages back... just ignore the song, ffs. The thing I hate most about clickbait is that it typically just further foments negativity, which spreads, and people get caught up in being angry over something that is ultimately meaningless.



I don't know. Everyone - myself included - is just such a miserable sack of shit these days, I guess anger feels easy and safe for most people. Sucks.

I don’t disagree. The guy’s going for easy clicks and I guess I gave him one so what do I know?

 

[super fly guy]

Is it there worst song? Not by a mile,is it there best? No,I probably won't go and purposely listen to it,but if it comes on shuffle that's fine.

 

[mikal]

As Magic Johnson would Tweet:

"U2 released a new song yesterday. It features instruments and Bono on vocals."

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

As Magic Johnson would Tweet:

"U2 released a new song yesterday. It features instruments and Bono on vocals."

 

[macawaca]

So, I’ve had a few hours away after maybe 3 listens, and I’ve just listened again. I pretty much remembered the melody and every word. Love it or hate it, it has an infectious quality that will play well in certain demos with certain audiences.

The fact it is a bit vanilla and beige, or that it doesn’t peak are probably causing people to over hyperbolise it’s deficiencies rather than be happy about some of the good points. And it is irrefutable that some elements of this song represent real progress away from some of the most frustrating and “bad” elements of recent U2 outputs - lyrical vomit, one dimensional melodies, perfunctory chord progressions, dynamic range - all things they have really struggled with for neigh on 20 years. This song is one big positive stride away from all of those issues. The lyrics are still saccharine, but they have integrity of concept, and are constructed more thoughtfully. The melody is interesting.

I think it’s far better than The Miracle or GOOYOW or American Soul. It shits on Boots. It’s sin is it’s boringness - which I would argue is a symptom of placement and purpose. It’s for a kids movie and sonically it is appropriate.

The longer I sit with it, the more comfortable I am. I don’t love it, but it could have been FAR worse. It’s a B-.

Spot on, you have to view it in the context for which it was created. And it’s pretty decent. Just because every song is not a Fly, beautiful day or vertigo, doesn’t mean they’re actually bad or poor.

 

[DeVaul]

Spot on, you have to view it in the context for which it was created. And it’s pretty decent. Just because every song is not a Fly, beautiful day or vertigo, doesn’t mean they’re actually bad or poor.

Indeed, and YMMV. For instance, I could deal with not hearing Beautiful Day live anymore ever again

 

[womanfish]

Indeed, and YMMV. For instance, I could deal with not hearing Beautiful Day live anymore ever again

I'll throw in Pride and One.

I still think U2 would be perfect to do an arena tour with 2 nights (at least) in each city, and have one night be The Hits, and then next be the Deep Cuts.

I definitely wouldn't go to the hits one, but there would be huge crossover of people for each show, and the Deep Cuts one might be more enjoyable without some of the riff raff in the audience.

 

[DeVaul]

I'll throw in Pride and One.



I still think U2 would be perfect to do an arena tour with 2 nights (at least) in each city, and have one night be The Hits, and then next be the Deep Cuts.



I definitely wouldn't go to the hits one, but there would be huge crossover of people for each show, and the Deep Cuts one might be more enjoyable without some of the riff raff in the audience.

I’d honestly hit both. The opening set of 6 hits on JT30 was incredible sustained energy. Imagine that for 2 hrs.

But hey, remember when U2 was going to do pairs of shows with different setlists and then wimped out? Fuckers.

 

[womanfish]

I’d honestly hit both. The opening set of 6 hits on JT30 was incredible sustained energy. Imagine that for 2 hrs.

But hey, remember when U2 was going to do pairs of shows with different setlists and then wimped out? Fuckers.

oh yeah! oy.

I also remember No Line was supposed to be a double album and then we got a single album with like 7 great songs on it. We certainly are a resilient bunch.

I wonder if The Fly would be a hit or deep cut... And if they actually played it as it should be.
Would be cool to have some Zooropa and POP get some attention.

 

[mikal]

I'm of the opposite opinion. I am totally on board with U2 doing a cool stage concept and just playing their greatest hits with 1 or 2 rarities that we haven't heard in years. Maybe even leave those rarities up to a fan vote on their website.

I'm at the point where I don't NEED new material. I'd just enjoy a nice night out in Chicago to see U2.

 

[lazarus]

The indie rock press loves it.

View attachment 13001

https://consequence.net/2021/11/u2-your-song-saved-my-life-stream/

I like Consequence of Sound for rock recommendations, but there's no need for them to even review it. That's my biggest complaint with Pitchfork over the last 15 years. They review U2 not to actually review U2, but to play into their U2 hating audience.

For what it's worth, Pitchfork posted an article about the release, sane comment. I guess they figure the tripe speaks for itself.

I was hoping to put New Order on my list, but their albums are just a bit to hit and miss for me and Substance is a compilation, so I wouldn't really count it. But great stuff nonetheless.

I thought about that when I included it. Here's the thing, though: you said a 5-year run. If you don't officially include Substance, the singles and b-sides that it compiles still represent work done by the band over that period, aside from a few early tracks before 1983. And that material is phenomenal.

 

[womanfish]

For what it's worth, Pitchfork posted an article about the release, sane comment. I guess they figure the tripe speaks for itself.



I thought about that when I included it. Here's the thing, though: you said a 5-year run. If you don't officially include Substance, the singles and b-sides that it compiles still represent work done by the band over that period, aside from a few early tracks before 1983. And that material is phenomenal.

True, I didn't really think of it that way. Good call

 

[ferball415]

The hyperbolic "oh my god this is the worst thing they've ever done they've lost it they'll never do Achtung Baby again the world is over" reaction in here is honestly just sad and played out.

The assertion that anyone said this is the only hyperbole.

 

[ferball415]

The Smiths 1984 to 1987 (Jesus Christ!)

The Smiths
Meat is Murder
The Queen is Dead
Strangeways Here We Come

All the runs you mentioned are excellent but I just came off a two-week-long kick of exclusively The Smiths--all 4 studio albums, Hatful/WWL/LTB/SotS, and just the box set (Complete) on shuffle and it was glorious. They have like maybe 5 clunkers out of 75 or so chunes.

As much as I adore The Smiths, they are slightly overrated by NME types (no, they are not better than The Beatles), and their run is not my favorite of the ones you listed (U2, '87-'91), but they certainly had an amazing and amazingly packed run with exceedingly few missteps. They are the "band I love the most that I most like to listen to on shuffle", which is unique. I think this is down to the nature of them being one of the last Great British Singles Bands (The Jam -->The Smiths-->possibly The Stone Roses-->Oasis), where their non-album singles/B-sides are often superior to any album material. In other words, as great as the studio albums are, I'd rather throw Louder Than Bombs on (and on shuffle). Anyway, deservedly legendary band.

On that note, the aforementioned Jam's '77-'82 run should be way up there as well. The Jam were fucking incredible.

 

[super fly guy]

Yea, it's exhausting. I've come to expect U2 bashing, but that article is just unnecessary. Kind of what I was alluding to a few pages back... just ignore the song, ffs. The thing I hate most about clickbait is that it typically just further foments negativity, which spreads, and people get caught up in being angry over something that is ultimately meaningless.



I don't know. Everyone - myself included - is just such a miserable sack of shit these days, I guess anger feels easy and safe for most people. Sucks.

It's embarrassing,they could have released streets yesterday,and I bet it would have been the same headline.

 

[womanfish]

All the runs you mentioned are excellent but I just came off a two-week-long kick of exclusively The Smiths--all 4 studio albums, Hatful/WWL/LTB/SotS, and just the box set (Complete) on shuffle and it was glorious. They have like maybe 5 clunkers out of 75 or so chunes.

As much as I adore The Smiths, they are slightly overrated by NME types (no, they are not better than The Beatles), and their run is not my favorite of the ones you listed (U2, '87-'91), but they certainly had an amazing and amazingly packed run with exceedingly few missteps. They are the "band I love the most that I most like to listen to on shuffle", which is unique. I think this is down to the nature of them being one of the last Great British Singles Bands (The Jam -->The Smiths-->possibly The Stone Roses-->Oasis), where their non-album singles/B-sides are often superior to any album material. In other words, as great as the studio albums are, I'd rather throw Louder Than Bombs on (and on shuffle). Anyway, deservedly legendary band.

On that note, the aforementioned Jam's '77-'82 run should be way up there as well. The Jam were fucking incredible.

Yep, I almost always find myself listening to Louder Than Bombs. My favorite non-comp album is Strangeways, I think it is the most consistent from a band that is insanely consistent.
There really isn't a Smith's song I don't like. Which is crazy, but even the couple that aren't the greatest are still pretty good.

 

[ferball415]

I like Consequence of Sound for rock recommendations, but there's no need for them to even review it. That's my biggest complaint with Pitchfork over the last 15 years. They review U2 not to actually review U2, but to play into their U2 hating audience.

While this is undoubtedly true of hipster-dom in general, I actually find Pitchfork to be pretty fair to U2. Yes, they gave the past three albums bad reviews (maybe they're on to something..), but they've actually managed to review everything from Boy to Zooropa (minus Rattle and Hum) retrospectively/for a reissue, and the scores have been 7.1 to 9.5. I'd say all things considered that's "lucky" given the band and publication in question.

 

[ferball415]

Yep, I almost always find myself listening to Louder Than Bombs. My favorite non-comp album is Strangeways, I think it is the most consistent from a band that is insanely consistent.
There really isn't a Smith's song I don't like. Which is crazy, but even the couple that aren't the greatest are still pretty good.

Yea, Morrissey himself actually recently put out a (preposterous, of course) list of his favorite Smiths/solo albums, and the highest Smiths entry was Louder at #8.

I do always skip "Golden Lights" if I'm not doing a "completist" listen of Louder. At least they didn't write it.

 

[BEAL]

So, I’ve had a few hours away after maybe 3 listens, and I’ve just listened again. I pretty much remembered the melody and every word. Love it or hate it, it has an infectious quality that will play well in certain demos with certain audiences.

The fact it is a bit vanilla and beige, or that it doesn’t peak are probably causing people to over hyperbolise it’s deficiencies rather than be happy about some of the good points. And it is irrefutable that some elements of this song represent real progress away from some of the most frustrating and “bad” elements of recent U2 outputs - lyrical vomit, one dimensional melodies, perfunctory chord progressions, dynamic range - all things they have really struggled with for neigh on 20 years. This song is one big positive stride away from all of those issues. The lyrics are still saccharine, but they have integrity of concept, and are constructed more thoughtfully. The melody is interesting.

I think it’s far better than The Miracle or GOOYOW or American Soul. It shits on Boots. It’s sin is it’s boringness - which I would argue is a symptom of placement and purpose. It’s for a kids movie and sonically it is appropriate.

The longer I sit with it, the more comfortable I am. I don’t love it, but it could have been FAR worse. It’s a B-.

U2's melodies and pop songs have absolutely gotten better. They've even attributed it to the Spiderman Musical because the songs do have to be bombastic and flow...less about a guitar / bass / drums

Unfortunately this has carried over into the U2 world. From a pure melody, I think they've really mastered a hook. It's much more catchy than stuff from their past, even their biggest hits.....there seemed to be a more understated hook or build up.

What's gone is Edge and atmosphere or anything interesting. They've turned into a backing band for Bono. A song like UTEOTW was driven by The Edge, the guitar is the hook.

I do not expect or want a Sing 2 soundtrack to be written in the vein of AB, but it really feels like the band is regulated to background vs nice guitar line to compliment the melody

I dunno, just rambling at this point

 

[Gonna Run 2 U]

I'm of the opposite opinion. I am totally on board with U2 doing a cool stage concept and just playing their greatest hits with 1 or 2 rarities that we haven't heard in years. Maybe even leave those rarities up to a fan vote on their website.

I'm at the point where I don't NEED new material. I'd just enjoy a nice night out in Chicago to see U2.

And I think this is the general consensus of A LOT of folks that go to U2 concerts for awhile now. I spoke with a lot of fans after the SOE concerts who said the set list was atrocious. They didn’t care about acrobat being played and had no interest in the “new stuff”. These people primarily wanted Boy-Unforgettable Fire with Joshua Tree for good measure.

 

[Irvine511]

Twice nominated, no wins. The Hands That Built America lost to Eminem's Lose Yourself, and Ordinary Love lost to Frozen.

In fairness to them, they lost to very, very worthy songs — arguably E’s best song, and the most memorable Disney song of the 21st century.

I’m sure they want an EGOT, although that T will never happen at this point.

The song is … not awful, especially not the first half which is pleasant, but the ending is pretty weak-assed to me, if not outright annoying. And I really enjoy WITS and love Love is Bigger and want it to keep going on and on Hey Jude-style.

It weirdly reminded me of the last Springsteen album, which had 0 staying power with me. I have listened to it once, and felt no need to listen again.

 

[Joey788]

A
For modern bands, Deerhunter were flawless between 2007 and 2011:
Cryptograms
Fluorescent Grey EP
Microcastle/Weird Era Continued
Rainwater Cassette Exchange EP
Halcyon Digest
Halcyon Digest b sides
60 Cycle Hum one off, final track with their original bassist

Smashing Pumpkins, 91-96, might be my winner though. A staggering amount of material was released, an even more staggering amount of ground was covered, and the quality was consistent.

For modern artists, I'd add in St. Vincent, Porcupine Tree and TV on the Radio.

St. Vincent - 2009 to 2014

Actor
Strange Mercy
Love this Giant (with Byrne)
St. Vincent

Porcupine Tree 2002 to 2007

In Absentia
Deadwing
Fear of a Blank Planet
Nil Recurring

TV on the Radio 2003 to 2008

Young Liars
Desperate Youth, Blood Thirsty Babes
Return to Cookie Mountain
Dear Science

 

[ferball415]

I'm of the opposite opinion. I am totally on board with U2 doing a cool stage concept and just playing their greatest hits with 1 or 2 rarities that we haven't heard in years. Maybe even leave those rarities up to a fan vote on their website.

I'm at the point where I don't NEED new material. I'd just enjoy a nice night out in Chicago to see U2.

And I think this is the general consensus of A LOT of folks that go to U2 concerts for awhile now. I spoke with a lot of fans after the SOE concerts who said the set list was atrocious. They didn’t care about acrobat being played and had no interest in the “new stuff”. These people primarily wanted Boy-Unforgettable Fire with Joshua Tree for good measure.

But didn't JT30, in most regards, scratch this itch, with early hits as a prelude, THE ALBUM, then later hits as an encore?

 

[DeVaul]

U2's melodies and pop songs have absolutely gotten better. They've even attributed it to the Spiderman Musical because the songs do have to be bombastic and flow...less about a guitar / bass / drums



Unfortunately this has carried over into the U2 world.

When I saw that garbage the songs had the crowd audibly groaning. IMO, the band has taken mostly the wrong lessons from that experiment, though Cedarwood Road feels like the most successful result of the story-song approach.

 

[BOYO3221]

Bruce springsteen hasnt madeba good song or album in 30 years....trash

 

[LuckyNumber7]

You’re all so strange.

 

[DeVaul]

Bruce springsteen hasnt madeba good song or album in 30 years....trash

The only stuff I wouldn’t qualify as “good” would be High Hopes and Working On a Dream. The rest? Good to great. Magic suffers from some stuffed production, though.

 

[DeVaul]

You’re all so strange.

guilty as charged

 

[dan_smee]

U2's melodies and pop songs have absolutely gotten better. They've even attributed it to the Spiderman Musical because the songs do have to be bombastic and flow...less about a guitar / bass / drums



Unfortunately this has carried over into the U2 world. From a pure melody, I think they've really mastered a hook. It's much more catchy than stuff from their past, even their biggest hits.....there seemed to be a more understated hook or build up.



What's gone is Edge and atmosphere or anything interesting. They've turned into a backing band for Bono. A song like UTEOTW was driven by The Edge, the guitar is the hook.



I do not expect or want a Sing 2 soundtrack to be written in the vein of AB, but it really feels like the band is regulated to background vs nice guitar line to compliment the melody



I dunno, just rambling at this point

I don’t think you’re rambling - it’s a good point. Edge is missing, and I get nervous whenever I hear piano in a new u2 song.

The thing here is - given for mine they have not only arrested the slide into terribleness on a number of fronts I’ve already mentioned, they have corrected and even improved on some things. Progress and reflection is possible. The context of this song being for children means it was never going to be a guitar driven monster, so I suppose combining those two things gives me hope that they might just one day make some music worthy of their history. Doesn’t have to be a massive hit, but has to be a credible and honest effort at great music. This isn’t great music, but I’m enough of an optimist to see the signs of the ship turning in this song, and acknowledge that contextually they couldn’t really have turned it any further in one swoop.

 

[phommel]

Who had the greatest five years of music output in Alt/modern/indie rock history. I am leaving out just straight rock, cause i really don't want to have to talk about The Beatles and Zep and the like.

Difficult to define what's alt/modern/indie. If U2 falls in this category, then I would also like to add:

Pearl Jam 1991-1994
Ten
Vs
Vitology

Springsteen 1975-1980
Born to Run
Darkness on the Edge of Town
The River

Guns n' Roses 1987-1991
Appetite for Destruction
G N' R Lies
Use Your Illusion I
Use Your Illusion II

But this would be my winner! -->

R.E.M. 1991 to 1996

Out of Time
Automatic For The People
Monster
New Adventures in Hi-Fi

followed by:

Radiohead 1995 to 2000

The Bends
OK Computer
Kid A

GO!