Bono: 'U2 album was too challenging'

[roy]

regardless of what you think of NLOTH, the above is true, Sadly!

 

[gman]

.

if they've lost it, how come no line on the horizon is rated by so many fans here as being better than at least their last two albums,

Dont think of it as losing it, think of it more as hopefully a temporary blip. as a fan of u2 for not a kick in the ass off 30 yrs, i can safely say, that is because....the two albums prior to NLOTH were sub standard offerings! I would agree that NLOTH is a more respectable album, but it pales in significance compared to 80s and 90s albums....IMO. I was shocked to learn NLOTH has only sold 3.5M

 

[U2opra]

I don't think it's fair for people here to say to other's "NLOTH is one of their best albums ever and "insert album name" sucks" because it's not fact is it? it's just matter of opinion.

In my opinion a measure of a good album for me is:

how many songs captivate me off the album
how well they translate into a live setting
the commercial success of the album

So based on that, my top 3 favouite albums are probably:

Achtung Baby
The Joshua Tree
All That You Can't Leave Behind

NLOTH is somewhere further down along with Pop for me. I like a lot of the songs, but I find not all of them captivate me. But this is purely my own experience and opinion. For others I would imagine they may list NLOTH as there No. 1 album and so on and so fourth.

 

[gman]

At the end of the day...how blessed are we, when we can mump and moan about poorer u2 albums........yet still really love listening to said albums!

 

[angelordevil]

At the end of the day...how blessed are we, when we can mump and moan about poorer u2 albums........yet still really love listening to said albums!

With that statement like that, why go to Church today?

Bring on SOA.

 

[coolian2]

At the end of the day...how blessed are we, when we can mump and moan about poorer u2 albums........yet still really love listening to said albums!

i don't like listening to all that you can't leave behind and how to dismantle i can't be bothered typing these damn long titles.

 

[gman]

i don't like listening to all that you can't leave behind and how to dismantle i can't be bothered typing these damn long titles.

part time fan

 

[Zoomerang96]

At the end of the day...how blessed are we, when we can mump and moan about poorer u2 albums........yet still really love listening to said albums!

Not me... not even maybe.

 

[indra]

I believe there are essentially two types of musicians/bands -- for one the music itself is the end; for the other the music is the means to the end. U2 is the latter; Neil Young is the former (financeguy and BonosSaint have already pointed this out about Young).

It seems to me that U2's goal has always been to be huge, to reach and be loved by as many people as possible. Their music is the way to do that. So I don't think it's much of a stretch to understand songs that don't accomplish that as well as they expect are perceived as failures, even if they essentially like the song. It will be interesting to see what the do with the next album.

I suspect whether one sees a particular song (or album, etc.) as "exactly what the band wants to make" or "merely a crass attempt to snare the more mainstream market" depends largely on how well the particular person likes (or dislikes) it.

 

[nielsgov]

I don't think NLOTH is a failure, commercially (only 3.5 million) and artistically. It's my second favourite U2 album. So I also don't agree with the people who say U2 has lost it or aren't as good as they were anymore (oh no I'm a newer fan). I just hope they don´t change direction for SOA because they didn´t have a second BD or Vertigo. The direction they were (hopefully are) going sounds good to me. I really hope we have an album that is more experimental than NLOTH (Kingdom Of Your Love sounds great).

I really do not think NLOTH is a hard album to get (if you know more music than Lady Gaga and Britney Spears of course). I am a fan since ATYCLB and I loved most of NLOTH from the beginning though there were some songs (like Fez and Cedars) that grew on me. If people think NLOTH is too difficult for them they cannot be real U2 fans because Zooropa, AB, Pop and TUF were way more difficult than NLOTH.

 

[gman]

So I also don't agree with the people who say U2 has lost it or aren't as good as they were anymore (oh no I'm a newer fan).

Yes, you are....and with respect, you will not comprehend the popularity/musical importance of the band from 1987-1994, because you were not interested in them during that period. This is not a critiscism!

 

[nielsgov]

Yes, you are....and with respect, you will not comprehend the popularity/musical importance of the band from 1987-1994, because you were not interested in them during that period. This is not a critiscism!

I wasn´t even alive then.

 

[U2opra]

I don't think NLOTH is a failure, commercially (only 3.5 million) and artistically. It's my second favourite U2 album. So I also don't agree with the people who say U2 has lost it or aren't as good as they were anymore (oh no I'm a newer fan). I just hope they don´t change direction for SOA because they didn´t have a second BD or Vertigo. The direction they were (hopefully are) going sounds good to me. I really hope we have an album that is more experimental than NLOTH (Kingdom Of Your Love sounds great).

I really do not think NLOTH is a hard album to get (if you know more music than Lady Gaga and Britney Spears of course). I am a fan since ATYCLB and I loved most of NLOTH from the beginning though there were some songs (like Fez and Cedars) that grew on me. If people think NLOTH is too difficult for them they cannot be real U2 fans because Zooropa, AB, Pop and TUF were way more difficult than NLOTH.

That's purely a matter of taste though surely? If someone doesn't 'get' or like the songs off albums like Pop, Zooropa or NLOTH, it doesn't make them any less of a U2 fan than you or me; it just means they like the other stuff by U2. Being a U2 fan doesn't mean liking everything U2 has done - I think people need to realize that

 

[angelordevil]

^ That will be inscribed in the Interference tombstone.

NLOTH is a huge success in the best possible sense...it's just a great album. Sales-wise, however, I'm still holding on to my Boots-before-last-Christmas theory.

 

[gman]

NLOTH is a huge success in the best possible sense...it's just a great album. .

And, thats all i ask from them, and all in all...they have yet to let me down. I couldnt care less if it sells 1M or 10M copies. As long as it pleases my ear.

 

[Gonna Run 2 U]

I hope they don't keep tinkering with Every Breaking Wave.

 

[BonosSaint]

Of course, Neil Young and Springsteen have the advantage of never having to take a vote. There is no "group" vision, direction. And less overhead. But as financeguy alluded, they don't particularly court a new audience (although Neil may have been when collaborating with Pearl Jam, but I also suspect it was to feed off their energy). I think with the HTDAAB era, U2 was actively trying to court a new audience, create a younger fanbase. If you set up (and U2 may have) to be all things, then you bear that burden. Your success, if you do it. Your failure if you don't. Those are the terms you set. You own it.

And it always looks a little more gracious if you don't blame somebody else.

 

[U2girl]

"I think with the HTDAAB era, U2 was actively trying to court a new audience, create a younger fanbase".

They're been doing this starting with AB. There is no way U2 would survive as long as they have if the newer generation of fans hadn't lapped up AB and as an extention, Zoo TV. (and of course about a decade later with ATYCLB and Elevation tour, and a little less so, Vertigo tour and Bomb)

I agree though with the general idea of this article - NLOTH is not the type of an album that would work with today's radio/general audience. They're all about the single, not the album.
That said...U2 may very well be plainly too old for another smash single, promotion or not. U2 of ATYCLB/Bomb would kill for something like Magnificent, but as they can see, that type of sound no longer flies in 2009. (and given Stuck's popularity, it's not too late for a non-first single to do well.)

 

[last unicorn]

As far as I remember, U2 trying to reach to a younger audience has always been one of the most critisiced moves of the band, especially here in this forum. Now many here are blaming the band for being unable to reach out to a younger audience and thus not being relevant anymore for today's music audience. I think most of us seriously need to make up their minds about what exactly we want and expect from this band. And I do think U2 have a much heavier burden to carry than any other band in this field.

 

[ZOOTVTOURist]

Since you have shown nothing but negativity towards the band here on this board

Ahem - pardon? I've shown not only negativity here, even if you will never get this point. But I am indeed sceptical about the current 360/NLOTH period (as the band is, too!) – even frightening, when I read statements by Bono like this – and when I read statements like yours, a really kind of no matter what following fan behaviour, that is part of the actual band crisis, in my opinion. With a view like this, the band will make another step forward ...

 

[An Cat Gav]

I do hope that the pursuit of a hit single wont turn SOA into another HTDAAB. The initial idea of a meditative album about faith and pilgramage sounded incredible, just what I'd been hoping for and what I think they need as artists. An understated album to satisfy themselves artisticticly, not just comercially, Kind of like Zooropa to Achtung Baby. I think NLOTH, although far from their best work was still a huge step in the right direction, only the inclusion of what were seen as more radio friendly tracks like SUC and Crazy tonight haled it being a truly excellent album.

 

[Rich79]

I think what Bono is talking about with pop songs won't start to happen until the album after SOA. To me, they're getting a bad taste in their mouths with the NLOTH material and will want SOA to be out sooner rather than later; while the tour is still on.

To me, it is a very frightening article and kind of what I expected would happen. An album that was supposed to be more experimental, but really wasn't, due to the addition of several "safety" songs that were supposed to chart well. And now, Bono kind of alludes to the problem being that they didn't have strong enough pop tunes on it. In my opinion, the album's weakness was trying too hard on getting pop songs on it and not focusing enough on the album as a whole. The whole thing has no real identity. Now we've been warned, more blatent attempts at radio hits coming. I have to say, its fighting fire with fire. With talk of going back to the Rubin sessions, I think we can say the next project after SOA will almost definitely be an ATYCLB clone. So Bono, NLOTH wasn't too challenging; it wasn't challenging enough. From a lot of what I read on these forums, it would appear that U2 fans were more than ready for a challenge. Instead, we got an album that doesn't quite make sense. Is it supposed to be experimental? Is it supposed to be a pop record? Is it even a complete idea? I guess, in that sense, it is challenging. What Bono says is downright frightening. The spirit of going off in a totally different direction without a safety net is apparently gone from this band and was the whole reason I liked them so much in the first place.

 

[subnet]

don't make a mountain out of a molehill guys

 

[Rich79]

Well, as always, I'll give whatever they do a chance and I'll buy it up like everything else U2. I obviously can't say I know the mentality of the band, but if they go even more experimental and adventurous after SOA, I'll be totally floored.

 

[U2girl]

"We weren't really in that mindset and we felt that the album was kind of an almost extinct species, and we should approach it in totality and create a mood and a feeling, and a beginning, $$$middle$$$ and end."

 

[financeguy]

NLOTH is much better than Zooropa, which is by far the worst U2 album,and Pop, which could have been great.

Listen, it's fine if you don't like Zooropa. It's a style of music that some love and some hate. It's the fact that you slag off Zooropa and Pop whilst insisting everyone else isn't a proper fan unless they love the more recent albums makes you come off like a complete hypocrite.

 

[financeguy]

I repeat, I have no problem whatever with U2 releasing chart friendly pop tunes provided they are great pop, but usually, to be frank, they are not. I remember when they re-recorded Sweetest Thing and put it out as a single in 1998. This was a song that been largely ignored up to then but the re-recorded version served its function of getting them back on the radio during the hiatus between Pop and ATYCB. I thought that single worked very well. In the run to Christmas 1998, I distinctly recall it was getting good radio play. But, by and large, Sweetest Thing is a rare exception. In general, U2 aren't particularly gifted at writing chart friendly pop music, in my view. I have nothing in particular against GOYB, but can anyone truly say it's a better track than Sweetest Thing?

 

[doctorwho]

Pretty simple: They just aren't as good as they used to be.

Not a big deal, they're approaching their 50's. Can't keep it up forever. Everything has an expiration date.

I disagree - both with you and, to an extent, Bono.

I concur that the album was, well, an album. And that this material is not the typical sugar-coated pop music, some of which U2 created on their last two releases.

JT is also not one of those albums - but times were different then. U2 were able to get a huge album and a string of hits from songs that really weren't typical pop music of the time. Even the haunting WOWY - a "love" song that usually do succeed on the charts - seemed a bit out of place compared to Michael Jackson, Bon Jovi, Debbie Gibson, Poison and the like of 1987. But I would contend that if U2 were to release JT today, it would not be the hit album it is. And not because of U2's age, but because people don't buy albums.

NLOTH is a fantastic album and easily one of my favorites. The songs are diverse (unlike some of U2's work - I'm looking at you, JT), and while there are some pop hits (like "Crazy") there are also flat out rock songs, soaring anthems, and bluesy epics. For U2 to have created an album like this at this point in their careers is mind-boggling. To say that they aren't as good as they used to be is incomprehensible to me.

That said, Bono is right, this album is a bit challenging and I can accept that some may simply not like it. There aren't the big hooks in the songs that U2 are famous for. This is an album not meant for the masses.

Still, when I went to the concerts, I could see people reacting to the new songs - songs that some clearly were hearing for the first time. And the audience reaction was great.

The trouble is that people don't buy music any more. So far, no album released this year has sold 2M copies in the U.S. That is incredible. In 2000, albums would sell 10M copies just in the U.S. But thanks to illegal file-sharing, people just download an album. iTunes has helped, but now people "cherry pick" songs, which also hurts album sales. Some artists have huge iTunes hits, but their albums flop.

Bono, and the rest of U2 - including their management - have to accept this change. NLOTH has sold over 1M copies in the U.S. - one of about 8 albums released this year to have reached that feat. Worldwide, it is the #1 album released this year, even though it has sold only between 3.2-3.8M copies (depending on which source one uses). For the #1 album not even sell 4M copies despite it being almost November - in a year where juggernauts like Eminem, Kelly Clarkson, Bruce Springsteen, Green Day, etc., all released albums - says a lot.

Bottom line - U2 didn't have the big hits off this album that they hoped. I'm not sure why. I can accept that some didn't like GOYB, but "Magnificent" should have been a huge hit. It's lack of success almost has me buying into that conspiracy theory about radio boycotting U2 (due to some comments Bono made about radio paying artists for playing their songs). But album sales have been strong as they can be, given the times. The tremendous success of the tour - even in "smaller" markets - shows that this isn't 1997. U2 can do stadium shows worldwide. And I hope U2 take this and don't produce another album full of potential "singles". That was a fun experiment for ATYCLB, but we don't need it again.

 

[An Cat Gav]

Listen, it's fine if you don't like Zooropa. It's a style of music that some love and some hate. It's the fact that you slag off Zooropa and Pop whilst insisting everyone else isn't a proper fan unless they love the more recent albums makes you come off like a complete hypocrite.

Hmm, I was thinking something similar....

 

[digitize]

I repeat, I have no problem whatever with U2 releasing chart friendly pop tunes provided they are great pop, but usually, to be frank, they are not. I remember when they re-recorded Sweetest Thing and put it out as a single in 1998. This was a song that been largely ignored up to then but the re-recorded version served its function of getting them back on the radio during the hiatus between Pop and ATYCB. I thought that single worked very well. In the run to Christmas 1998, I distinctly recall it was getting good radio play. But, by and large, Sweetest Thing is a rare exception. In general, U2 aren't particularly gifted at writing chart friendly pop music, in my view. I have nothing in particular against GOYB, but can anyone truly say it's a better track than Sweetest Thing?

I personally pretty much loathe Sweetest Thing in every format, so yes, I can say that I strongly prefer Boots.