Disillusioned with U2

[Headache in a Suitcase]

The Stones get way, way too much shit. They're an easy target, especially by folks who have only a very casual acquaintance with their catalog. They are also in the top 3 live acts I've witnessed, and I've seen dozens. For a band approaching 70 to still have that energy, verve and commitment is truly mind-blowing.

The energy and dedication to performance that Mick Jagger gives is a sight to behold.

He is truly one of a kind.

 

[BVS]

Its imaginative at the very least.

It's not imaginative at all. Sure it's fun every once in awhile, a few bands do it, most don't.

It keeps the band/artist in the public eye and gives the fans big thank you.
How many fans on here have craved just to hear Acrobat alone. Imagine if U2 announced they were going to do a full sequential October or Zooropa.
The place would go mental. The ensuing maelstrom of activity might just up the proliferation of writing and producing instead of this vacuum that the band seem to withdraw to between albums.

This place might go mental, sure... but other than that it does nothing. Thinking that reliving an old album might increase their proliferation is a rather bizarre theory. It makes no sense.

Look some bands are more prolific than others who cares? Prolific doesn't always equal quality either. They did three albums in the 90's and three in the 00's, you would think some would figure out the pattern.

 

[MrPryck2U]

I think we can understand now why Duff has a whopping 15 posts in 10 years. Your posts aren't exactly insightful, although they do incite something. (See what I did there?) That would be confusion and bewilderment. You do realize they toured way back in... 2011, right? I know it was so long ago, but maybe you can remember. U2 do stadium shows because they've got so many damn fans that an arena just wouldn't be enough to hold them all.


Good thing you're not a Guns N Roses fan. It took them 17 YEARS for a true follow up to their Use Your Illusion albums. That's over 3 times the "waiting" that you've had to do after U2's last album.

 

[Rarry]

Drugs are bad, punctuation is good.

Brilliant!!

 

[Duff]

I think we can understand now why Duff has a whopping 15 posts in 10 years. Your posts aren't exactly insightful, although they do incite something. (See what I did there?) That would be confusion and bewilderment. You do realize they toured way back in... 2011, right? I know it was so long ago, but maybe you can remember. U2 do stadium shows because they've got so many damn fans that an arena just wouldn't be enough to hold them all.


Good thing you're not a Guns N Roses fan. It took them 17 YEARS for a true follow up to their Use Your Illusion albums. That's over 3 times the "waiting" that you've had to do after U2's last album.

2009 in England, and only three gigs in this country.
Doesn't matter that all the fans may not get in to the arena's. Those that want tickets will get them, especially if they are given out by the usual criteria i.e. fan club pre-sales and not using Ticketbastard.
Although it may not appear to some on here, i really want this next album to succeed.

 

[MrPryck2U]

2009 in England, and only three gigs in this country.
Doesn't matter that all the fans may not get in to the arena's. Those that want tickets will get them, especially if they are given out by the usual criteria i.e. fan club pre-sales and not using Ticketbastard.
Although it may not appear to some on here, i really want this next album to succeed.

Weak.


U2 have nothing left to prove. With the exception of an Academy Award, they have done it all.

 

[Galeongirl]

So because U2 hasn't toured since 2009 in your country they somehow done you wrong?


Go on and have a chat with their asian fans mate.

They don't owe you shite. They toured last in 2011, that it wasn't in England isn't fucking relevant. THey still toured half the planet so it counts as them touring.

 

[allbecauseofu2]

duff, what other bands are you into? curious.

 

[gvox]

The energy and dedication to performance that Mick Jagger gives is a sight to behold.

He is truly one of a kind.

The Rolling Stones - Prudential Center - Newark, NJ - 2012.12.15 - Full Concert - HD. - YouTube

I wonder if Chris Rock agrees (skip to 1:17 )

 

[nesquick]

A back-catalogue of great music, and you feel they owe you something? 37 years in a band, they owe you FUCK ALL. There is an album, they are making it as good as they feel they can. If you don't like it, don't listen to it. Fucking hell, these entitled, prissy, whinging fucks that just want to trash the band without even hearing the new album amaze me. You know what, they have given us a shit-ton of great music, and if they want to take their time, at this age and enjoy their lives, they deserve it. It is absolutely frustrating that they seem to want to get music out quickly, and then go back on it, but that is their right. Jesus wept you people make me crazy. Grow the fuck up, wait like a normal person or find another band.

Amen!!! 100% with this

 

[Niceman]

Looks like its a 5 year wait for a new album.
Now lets see whats been going on in those 5 year. I see bands touring smaller venues, doing back catalogues and generally giving fans some kind of value for their support.
What do we get from U2. Nothing. Except promises of a new album that is 'really exciting' and breaking new boundaries.
These were the same "forecasts" we got for NLOTH and it turned out to be a dud. In my opinion, the worst album of U2's career.
The band now stand at a crossroads. Bono's standing with the general public seems to be at an all time low. Most people now just switch off when they hear him start rambling. They just want to hear him sing
A band are judged by their output and although U2 have a massive back catalogue, they seem to take pride in moving onward and upward and stretching the boundaries of modern music. Otherwise its just a stonesesque revue, treading the boards every 5-6 years.
The new album needs to be good. And i mean very good, otherwise i'm afraid they could be on the steady decline, a la mick and co.
As we know, U2 albums seem to come in batches of three, of which NLOTH was the third, so hopefully!
Final rant is, why do U2 feel they can only play to the largest amount of people possible. Springsteen has been doing arenas constantly, as have other bands. Sure, some people will be disappointed not to get tickets, but Hey Ho.
Live shows and albums are what its all about. Without those, your just a cyberstar.

I'm not disillusion with U2. I am really let down by these 5 year gaps between albums. I disagree with you about NLOTH. For me, it's at least the best album since POP. I would have loved to hear it's companion record, Songs of Ascent in late 2009, as they originally planned.

On the one hand, I hate that so many of these decisions come down to money as opposed to art. On the other, U2 can be pushed by a perceived misstep into a new creative space.

It's time for a new record. It's way past time. And I hope they have two more in the barrel.

 

[dan_smee]

Not anywhere in my OP did i say that U2 owed me anything. Don't twist my words to suit your reply.
No need for all the expletives either mate. Not big and not clever. I've been sworn at by 6'5 miners at the coal face, so keyboard warriors come way down on the "frightened of" list.

What do we get from U2. Nothing.

What do WE get? Your words infer that you feel entitled to music.

And sorry, keyboard warriors? Your talk of big scary miners is oh so impressive to me, but you seem to be over-playing your own personal contribution to this debate. Most of my post was directed at a number of un-named 'keyboard warriors' that play the same dour tune that you are. You are one of a tireless troupe of boorish downers that need better hobbies.

 

[U2girl]

The Stones get way, way too much shit. They're an easy target, especially by folks who have only a very casual acquaintance with their catalog. They are also in the top 3 live acts I've witnessed, and I've seen dozens. For a band approaching 70 to still have that energy, verve and commitment is truly mind-blowing.

I don't think people doubt their live shows (if watching 3 corpses and a hyperactive grandpa is your thing), though the age is allegedly showing on Keith Richards' fingers...

Rather, the quality of their output for the past 20+ years.

 

[MrPryck2U]

I don't think people doubt their live shows (if watching 3 corpses and a hyperactive grandpa is your thing), though the age is allegedly showing on Keith Richards' fingers...

Rather, the quality of their output for the past 20+ years.

Wow, ageism at its worst.



The quality of the Stones' output in the last 20+ years has been pretty damn good. Steel Wheels, Voodoo Lounge and Bridges to Babylon were definitely solid albums. A Bigger Bang was pretty good too. Even though there's snow on the roof, there's still fire in the furnace.


U2 will release a new album when they feel it's ready.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

I don't think people doubt their live shows (if watching 3 corpses and a hyperactive grandpa is your thing), though the age is allegedly showing on Keith Richards' fingers... Rather, the quality of their output for the past 20+ years.

...says a poster on a message board that does nothing but complain about everything U2 has released over the last 20 years.

 

[lemonfly]

3 corpses and a hyperactive grandpa

Spoken like someone who has a) never seen the Stones live and b) doesn't know their catalog beyond the obvious radio hits. I'm willing to bet I'm correct on both counts.

 

[bigjohn2441]

I am disillusioned with them, which I thought could never happen.

I was kind of excited that there was a clip of a new song, although kind of disinterested. (I guess 5 LONG years of no new material can do that)

So after hearing it I sadly say that I am even more disillusioned. Finally after 5 long years and THIS is what we get? I will be very dissapointed if this is the direction they are going with the new album, assuming it doesn't take another few years for them to release it. Obviously I can't assume too much based on a clip of 1 song, but I was hoping for more of a return to the great rock tunes that I loved from the 80's and early 90's and less of the whiny-sounding bullshit which has become more and more common in recent years.

 

[MrPryck2U]

Dude, its only been 4 years. I wouldn't judge their next album's sound on Ordinary Love.

 

[corianderstem]

Obviously I can't assume too much based on a clip of 1 song...

Apparently you can!

 

[Von Schloopen]

Ha!

 

[gareth brown]

I disillusioned with The Beatles. They haven't toured recently or released any records.

Agreed. Man, they really need to start to deliver new material or the world will forget all about them!

I know, what the fuck is this? They've spent nearly 50 years on this Live At The BBC Volume 2 album. i've had it with them. never mind John and George, they're all dead to me..

 

[MrPryck2U]

Hey Duff and the other disillusioned, U2 is dropping 2 songs at the end of November. Granted, these songs aren't indicative of U2's next album, but at least it's "new" material.

 

[Von Schloopen]

Hey Duff and the other disillusioned, U2 is dropping 2 songs at the end of November. Granted, these songs aren't indicative of U2's next album, but at least it's "new" material.

Ha!

If U2's fantastic back catalog isn't enough to interest him, there's very little chance a new song is going to tip the scales.

 

[MrPryck2U]

Ha!

If U2's fantastic back catalog isn't enough to interest him, there's very little chance a new song is going to tip the scales.

Well, some of these U2 fans are a fickle bunch. Throw them a tasty appetizer and they'll be salivating for the entrée.

 

[dabiggestu2fan]

Will ya disillusioned U2 fans quit judging based on a stinky 1 min clip with talking over it of a song that will not even be on the album already? Here is a brown paper bag breathe in and out slowly. It WILL be ok! U2's new album will not be shit. This whole talk about how U2 sucks based on this one song (which we haven't even heard) is getting more stinky then a pile of shit sitting on the hot sun for a few days.

 

[Galeongirl]

I know, what the fuck is this? They've spent nearly 50 years on this Live At The BBC Volume 2 album. i've had it with them. never mind John and George, they're all dead to me..

Now now, that we're no more fans isn't reason to wish them dead!

 

[gvox]

I'm disillusioned with you too.

Spoiler

SEE WUT l DID THAR GUYZ WINK WINK

 

[MrPryck2U]

Don't forget Hugh Tu.

 

[YBORCITY]

I thought about this thread for awhile and through a haze of Ketel 1 and a bit of a hangover this morning, I for one am not disillusioned with U2. After seeing them the last time at the new Giants Stadium or MetLife or whatever it's called this week on the 360 Tour. I thought to myself this could be my last U2 show and I would be fine with that. The band sounded fantastic that night and played a bunch from AB which they played with a ferocity (Edge literally ripped off our faces that night). It was only 100 degrees and with humidity that rivaled the Florida shows, the boy's pulled a great one off.... but I digress....

I was a bit peeved at the wait for the new album ( ZOMG 5 YEARS!!! ) and the bumblings of U2.com but now have a differing perspective. These guys are getting a bit older, they all have families that they want to be a part of. Maybe.... just maybe they kicked ass for so many years that now, if they feel like taking 5 years between albums good on them. what ever the reasons it just doesn't matter, I will prolly do the following things like I've done for most U2 albums:

1>. Buy CD (yes I'm old AND old school)
2>. Love 3-5 songs, Like 3-5 songs and not like 1-2
3>. Buy Tix for multiple shows around the country (US)
4>. Plan business trips around concerts
5>. Bitch about setlists ( ZOMG They're NOT playing Acrobat)

Wait for next album if there is one.

 

[Cask]

This happens I believe with every band that has reached massive stardom and they have lived enough to enjoy the super rock star status for a while. The Stones, U2, etc, they had all made huge contribution to rock music, and the truth, they became huge rock stars DECADES ago and people expect to continue delivering ground breaking record. But for these bands, their own past if their greatest enemy. If U2 pulled a second Joshua Tree or Achtung Baby, fans will say they are rehashing the same old stuff. If the pull an experimental, ground breaking record, people will say they have lost it, without even resembling what they once were. This happens across all genres.

For example, Metallica, a band whose career is in my opnion very similar to U2's, despite being different genres. They became the greatest metal band in the 80's, in the early 90's they became more radio friendly and became one of the world's greatest stars, late 90's they became more experimental and the "hardcore fans" became disappointed. In the 2000's they tried to return to their roots, and Death Magnetic had some really great metal songs, but fans thought they were trying too hard to emulate their earlier success.

When a band becomes so big as those example, they will NEVER be able to reach the expectations set upon them, no matter whey they do, their fans will never be completely satisfied.