SOI just became a gem.
Typically, since 1997, the really great/deeper U2 songs are not released right away. Think of 'Kite' and even 'Walk On' ('the latter was, what, the 4th and last single, while 'Kite' wasn't even a single, lol). Post 1995 U2 and/or the record company seem to pick the songs with the least depth when promoting albums actually. It shouldn't be a surprise that the only deep song we've heard so far from this album is one they've only played at The Joshua Tree shows ('Little Things'), as that was not really part of the album promo. There are still 9 songs we haven't heard, let's remember, and still plenty of room for those deeper cuts.I actually like GOYB and AMAAW, but point taken, for the most part.
My revised takeaway is this: the signs of U2 drifting towards a generic sound plus inane Bonoisms have been around for awhile, at least since ATYCLB. Their roots may even extend into the 90s, depending on what our attitude will be towards Bono's less-sincere usage towards such lyrics (which I won't try to litigate here). The specifics of it aren't that important, but the point is that this stuff has a legacy.
What's really concerning here is that we've heard 1/3 of the album and there's not much of a sign of anything particularly impressive so far. So far, we have basically a pretty generic sound and lyrics that are at best okay and at worst an impressively substantial collection of inane Bonisms for 1/3 of an album. Sure, I've come to like YTBTAM a good bit more, especially with the music videos. But is it really the best song on the album? Feels that way so far to me. And it doesn't even hit the middling highs of SOI.
ATYCLB, HTDAAB, and NLOTH all had their issues, for sure. But there are incredibly special moments on each of those albums. SOI was much thinner on that front. I'm worried that SOE will be thinner still.
So, we will see. You're right that a generic sound and inane Bonoisms aren't new to 2017. But I'm just not sure we'll get something much above decent.
At least we know it will be Rolling Stone's Album of the Year.
Typically, since 1997, the really great/deeper U2 songs are not released right away. Think of 'Kite' and even 'Walk On' ('the latter was, what, the 4th and last single, while 'Kite' wasn't even a single, lol). Post 1995 U2 and/or the record company seem to pick the songs with the least depth when promoting albums actually. It shouldn't be a surprise that the only deep song we've heard so far from this album is one they've only played at The Joshua Tree shows ('Little Things'), as that was not really part of the album promo. There are still 9 songs we haven't heard, let's remember, and still plenty of room for those deeper cuts.
Typically, since 1997, the really great/deeper U2 songs are not released right away. Think of 'Kite' and even 'Walk On' ('the latter was, what, the 4th and last single, while 'Kite' wasn't even a single, lol). Post 1995 U2 and/or the record company seem to pick the songs with the least depth when promoting albums actually. It shouldn't be a surprise that the only deep song we've heard so far from this album is one they've only played at The Joshua Tree shows ('Little Things'), as that was not really part of the album promo. There are still 9 songs we haven't heard, let's remember, and still plenty of room for those deeper cuts.
For a lot of us here, re-employing Eno seems like the necessary silver bullet. But of course it isn't. They had Eno and ignored/replaced him near the end of the No Line sessions.
The issue is U2. The four men who wrote Shadows and Tall Trees when they were 17 and 18. They are in charge, and they're choosing this.
I think Pop U2 is very much the same as HMTMKMKM U2. Pop is absolutely the last in the 90s trilogy.
At least we know it will be Rolling Stone's Album of the Year.
I dunno. When I think Hold Me Thrill Me Kiss Me Kill Me I think MacPhisto and the Achtung/Zooropa era. We can debate the exact location of the split til we are blue in the face, but it's there. I chose prior to Pop because that's when I feel like they really changed their sound to follow the trends.
I recently saw a YouTube video with early versions of some of the Pop songs. I really do think that was the album that divides classic U2 and modern U2.
See, if U2 began their career in 2000, there's not a chance in hell I'd be a fan of them.
Lucky they were so fucking good before then.
This album seems entirely mastered for headphones so far. It seems very flat and dull through speakers, but there are a lot of subtle details and the sound somehow richer on headphones. Maybe I’m crazy - anyone else hear it this way?
Overall, very positive first impressions of the new tracks for me. Blackout my standout so far.
Would you still go to see U2 on this new tour if no songs from before 2000 are played?
This album seems entirely mastered for headphones so far. It seems very flat and dull through speakers, but there are a lot of subtle details and the sound somehow richer on headphones. Maybe I’m crazy - anyone else hear it this way?
Overall, very positive first impressions of the new tracks for me. Blackout my standout so far.
Would you still go to see U2 on this new tour if no songs from before 2000 are played?
Would you?
First response: shit no.
Second response: maybe one show out of idle curiosity, if the date and venue suited.
I mean, if they did a 2000s/10s set with stuff like The Ground Beneath Her Feet, Fez, Cedarwood Road, and The Troubles in it, that wouldn't be too bad, there'd be some great stuff to enjoy. But I've no interest in hearing the ATYCLB/HTDAAB hits yet again, and the singles thereafter are mostly detritus. The JT30 encore is the most bored I've ever been at a U2 show, and I had to stand through In a Little While on 360.
Well, lets narrow it down even more.
How about only songs from Innocence and Experience. Just those two albums. Would you go to see that? I would. It would be so different from any of their prior tours. It would be exciting with all the new stuff.
Well, lets narrow it down even more.
How about only songs from Innocence and Experience. Just those two albums. Would you go to see that? I would. It would be so different from any of their prior tours. It would be exciting with all the new stuff.
I'm on Team The TouristI dunno. When I think Hold Me Thrill Me Kiss Me Kill Me I think MacPhisto and the Achtung/Zooropa era. We can debate the exact location of the split til we are blue in the face, but it's there. I chose prior to Pop because that's when I feel like they really changed their sound to follow the trends.
I recently saw a YouTube video with early versions of some of the Pop songs. I really do think that was the album that divides classic U2 and modern U2.
Your idea of exciting isnt the same as mine.
Yeah, it sounds incredibly better through headphones.