Have U2's 21st century releases done irreparable damage to their legacy?

[lazarus]

I expect to hear Queen of the Supermarket a bit more frequently in the produce section

Lettuce never speak about this ever again.


*cue Old Navy commercial set to Girls in Their Summer Clothes*

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Word is Jessica Springsteen was against the deal as she wanted to take over the catalog for herself, but her horse Tom Wambsgans fucked her over in the end.

 

[melon]

(Glad to see you checking in again)

Hi Melon [emoji112]

Hello, hello!

 

[Snowlock]

I enjoyed post-ATYCLB U2, but there's no doubt that HTDAAB was a let down. We wanted raw, visceral music from U2 again, and the hints we were getting at the time from the band seemed to be in that vein, iirc. But then we got an album that was way too polished. Vertigo was cool, but the rest of that album was too slick, too pro-tooled, too over produced to be "punk rock from venus."

NLOTH was a great reversal, except there was no big single. Boots was too silly of a subject to take seriously and as to the other contenders: I've heard the tempo of Breathe compared to waltzing matilda, accurately; and Stand Up Comedy had too much Christian Rock in it lyrically that it made people uncomfortable. And Winter wasn't finished.

I don't hate what they did in the first decade of the 21st century.

But I definitely hate the 2nd.

Putting Songs of Innocence on everyone's iPhone was bad. The fact that the album was shit was worse. The miracle was a reskinned version of Vertigo (just like boots was) so many of these songs sounded so boring. No distortion, no reverb, no echo, just blah. The a-side is okayish, but that b-side is pure and the tempos of the songs were the worst. They just sound old and slow and old.

And then they doubled down on it with Songs of Experience. Taking the worst of SOE's B-side and making a whole album out of it.

It's like they listened to the songs Violet Hill and Magic by Coldplay and decided to make 2 albums worth of these songs.

There's some decent stuff amongst these two disasters: Invisible, Ordinary Love, Iris, Every Breaking Wave and The Little Things That Give You Away; but holy cow if Your Song Saved My Life, A Song for Someone and Love Is Bigger Than Anything In Its Way were in a lineup and you asked me to differentiate between them, I don't think I could.

I hope somehow if they have one more album to go, they can go out on a high note. I don't think the 2000's did much damage to their legacy, but the 2010's sure did.

 

[dan_smee]

I do wonder what u2’s popular standing would be in an alternate universe where they went away for a while after HTDAAB, and took the best musical ideas from NLOTH, blended them into the “Songs of” project, and it was released as a double album in 2014 - innocence for free as an elective download, experience as a companion for purchase/streaming, and a massive world tour in 2015/2016 that saw Songs of Ascent released a-la Zooropa after an American, European, row set of legs, but before returning to Europe and finishing in the US.

They could then do TJT30 riding a wave from what would have undoubtedly been a triumphant return, and I doubt 21st u2 would have quite the bad reputation.

For clarity, in my scenario MOS, bits of Magnificent (but as others rightly point out, needs massive reworking with vocals etc), bits of NLOTH, Cedars, Breathe - these things would be stripped for parts and become the basis on songs that would replace American Soul, GOOYOW, and other clunky moments across the two albums. Invisible and ordinary love would be firmly on the albums.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

i honestly wonder what their popular standing would be if they just made the fucking album download optional.

 

[lazarus]

I do wonder what u2’s popular standing would be in an alternate universe where they went away for a while after HTDAAB, and took the best musical ideas from NLOTH, blended them into the “Songs of” project, and it was released as a double album in 2014

You're suggesting they take a 8-9 year break after winning the Grammy for album of the year and while riding another crest of mass popularity?

No.

No Line taking so long to come out is already part of the reason it failed.

 

[zoopop]

You're suggesting they take a 8-9 year break after winning the Grammy for album of the year and while riding another crest of mass popularity?

No.

No Line taking so long to come out is already part of the reason it failed.

This.

NLOTH took way too long to put out. There was so much hype for GOYB. I remember reading about the listening parites for the song and album. And there was an uneasy feeling about GOYB. U2 fans wanted to like it because it was over 5 years since a proper U2 single/album but it was a hot mess. Don't forget about this:



I don't think U2 have had many bad live TV performances but this one just alwasy felt off...

 

[womanfish]

You're suggesting they take a 8-9 year break after winning the Grammy for album of the year and while riding another crest of mass popularity?

No.

No Line taking so long to come out is already part of the reason it failed.

Yeah, this was my first thought as well. They were riding a wave of popularity from All That through Bomb, gobs of grammy's actual hit songs. Best thing they could have done was to release No Line in 07 or 08 at the latest, and obviously a different lead single. Magnificent probably would have been the shoe in. (I love Magnificent, sorry not sorry)

Even better would have been them actually creating the album they set out to. A sprawling, atmospheric double album. Hell I'd even take a single album of that. But instead we got about 2/3rds of an album of that, and 1/3rd inexplicable songs.

To answer Headache's question. I think U2 would be in much better standing if they had an accept or decline option with Apple. But if No Line were another high quality, hit album (all the way through) I don't know if the Apple thing would have been quite as serious.

Who knows. But I think a band that was the biggest in the world for over 25 years... people were just waiting for a slip to bring them down a notch or 10.

 

[womanfish]

This.

NLOTH took way too long to put out. There was so much hype for GOYB. I remember reading about the listening parites for the song and album. And there was an uneasy feeling about GOYB. U2 fans wanted to like it because it was over 5 years since a proper U2 single/album but it was a hot mess. Don't forget about this:



I don't think U2 have had many bad live TV performances but this one just alwasy felt off...

I dunno. I don't love Boots. But the performance was actually pretty damn good. After having a similar lead with Vertigo though, leading with song was just dumb on multiple levels.

 

[Irvine511]

The song is a train wreck, but that was a highly energetic performance and Bono was in rock god mode.

 

[Hewson]

I dunno. I don't love Boots. But the performance was actually pretty damn good.

I agree. Thought the performance was good at the time, still think so rewatching now. Boots was a good live song, lots of energy, well received at the two 360 shows I saw. It's a Frankenstein of a song to be sure, but this live performance of it didn't do them any harm.

That said, Magnificent would have been a better choice for lead single and with Adam's heavy bass line leading off would have been a very good opener for these Grammys.

 

[lazarus]

Yeah, whether or not you think Boots is good or whether it was a bad lead single choice, I don’t think this performance was the problem.

Better than them playing some shit-fritter on a barge alone in the middle of the winter, that’s for sure.

 

[tommycharles]

Yeah, whether or not you think Boots is good or whether it was a bad lead single choice, I don’t think this performance was the problem..

If anything I think this performance wrote checks that NLOTH couldn’t cash.

 

[womanfish]

If anything I think this performance wrote checks that NLOTH couldn’t cash.

I agree and disagree. I mean. I've said it a lot. But the band's issue with lead singles hasn't always been that the song is terrible. It's that it doesn't represent the tone of the album. (and maybe that's what you mean?)

The whole initial concept of No Line was supposed to be a more loose and atmospheric affair with some Moroccan influence thrown in. It's known that the team wasn't very happy when they returned with very little of the Moroccan sound. But, the bulk of the album, at least has some of the meandering, atmospheric, meditative vibe. Boots is not the song to convey this message.

So while they probably wouldn't want to release Cedars as a lead single, that would never see the light of day on radio, I think the both No Line and Magnificent would both have been great choices.

Vertigo is a good example of the perfect lead single - as was Beautiful Day, WOWY and NYD... Desire, and The Fly also very good)
Vertigo is a much stronger and cohesive song than Boots, plus it represented the rest of the album well.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

i believe the issue with the Grammy performance was people wondering why the hell they were opening the Grammys when they weren't nominated for, you know, a Grammy. it seemed like they were putting themselves somewhere they didn't belong just because they were U2.

oh, if the naïve and innocent folks of 2009 only knew...

a few highlights from the Interference Grammy performance thread (which filled up TWO full threads, btw)

https://www.u2interference.com/foru...t-the-grammy-awards-192838-9.html#post5827056

Originally Posted by Fullonedge3 View Post
Why, so people could download it instead of buy it?
Because it creates buzz--radio, Facebook, etc. FREE is the most powerful marketing tool. It's just a better strategy. Only die hards will buy it--and even in that case it was only a blip--again, not even in the Top 100 on iTunes--that in and of itself is a PR nightmare.

oops.

performance live reactions begin here...

https://www.u2interference.com/foru...-the-grammy-awards-192838-30.html#post5834701

the instant reactions are, uh, not as kind as your reflections.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Reviews of the U2 Grammy performance:

"With a brawny guitar riff between bursts of lyrics about fear and joy, ['Get On Your Boots'] was full of boisterous bravado, as if defying all portents of economic downturn and recording-business woes." -- http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/09/ar...areles.html?hp

"A forgettable opening hour included a limp leadoff set by U2, which performed its go-nowhere new single 'Get On Your Boots.' " -- Robert Plant reaps Grammy glory | Freep.com | Detroit Free Press

"The best evidence for this was a generally dismal sound mix, most notable during...U2’s glossy opening with 'Get Your Boots On (Sexy Boots),' the bland and tuneless single from its new album due in March." -- Jennifer Hudson wins at marathon Grammys show :: CHICAGO SUN-TIMES :: Entertainment

"As for performances, U2 frontman Bono sounded a bit breathless during the show’s opening number, Get Your Boots On." -- Robert Plant, Alison Krauss strike Grammy gold | Entertainment | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle

"U2 opened the show with "Get On Your Boots," the bombastic first single from its forthcoming album, "No Line On The Horizon," with a stage set to match, bringing to mind its big-budget '90s shows." -- Plant, Krauss' collaboration takes top Grammys

"Shouldn't Radiohead or Coldplay open the show? Any of the album of the year nominees maybe? Instead, we have Bono singing with the lyrics to the song blasted on the screen behind him, all set for inclusion in the next edition of Rock Band." -- Best & Worst: Grammys 2009 - The Envelope - LA Times

"Trust me, this is the worst song on the new album, and why they're parading it around as their reintroduction to the marketplace is beyond me. And just a word on the lyrics: Who is supposed to be putting on these sexy boots? Bono's wife? Some composite hot teenager? Carrie Underwood? The Jonas Brothers? And what are they gonna do once they put them on? And is the biggest problem for someone putting on said sexy boots that they don't know how beautiful they are? Note: Never put lyrics on a video screen unless it's already universally acknowledged that they don't suck. Especially if one of the lines is: 'Satan loves a bomb scare but he won't scare you.'" -- All 25 Grammy Performances -- Ranked! | Spin Magazine Online

"Bono ended U2’s opening performance of 'Get on Your Boots' by doffing his sunglasses to reveal: guyliner? Dude, the only men who can get away with eyeliner at this stage are Pete Wentz and that weirdo Other who doesn’t age on Lost." -- Grammy Highs and Grammy Lows

"...when Bono began to move we were concerned that he had been in an accident. Turns out that's just how Bono dances now." -- Ken Levine: 2009 Grammy Review by Two People in Their 20s

 

[Irvine511]

i believe the issue with the Grammy performance was people wondering why the hell they were opening the Grammys when they weren't nominated for, you know, a Grammy. it seemed like they were putting themselves somewhere they didn't belong just because they were U2.

oh, if the naïve and innocent folks of 2009 only knew...

a few highlights from the Interference Grammy performance thread (which filled up TWO full threads, btw)

https://www.u2interference.com/foru...t-the-grammy-awards-192838-9.html#post5827056



oops.

performance live reactions begin here...

https://www.u2interference.com/foru...-the-grammy-awards-192838-30.html#post5834701

the instant reactions are, uh, not as kind as your reflections.

Mine is almost word-for-word the same, even down to “rock god.”

This is why I’m an Honest Broker.






The professional reviews are mostly low-hanging look-I’m-mocking-Bono fruit, truly the easiest mark in music. Bono could perform CPR on a passed out fan and save her life and people would be like “CALM DOWN, MR MESSIAH COMPLEX! LET’S SEE YOU RESURECT YOUR TAXES!”

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

hey all you crazy cats and honest brokers... it's Rolling Stone's 50 Worst Business Decisions In Music History!

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/...lbum-away-for-free-in-itunes-2014-1234629428/

Coming in hot at #9...

U2 moved from clubs to arenas to stadiums over the course of just a few years by thinking big. It was a mentality that served them quite well throughout the Eighties, Nineties, and early 2000s, but they took it a bit too far in 2014 when they linked a deal with Apple in which their album Songs of Innocence would show up for free to every single Apple user’s personal devices. We’re talking about a non-insignificant percent of planet Earth here, and it was quickly revealed that not everyone who owned a phone was by definition a U2 fan. The backlash was swift and brutal, especially since Songs of Innocence wasn’t exactly another Joshua Tree or Achtung Baby in terms of quality. Before long, Apple was forced to create a tool that allowed users to delete the record with a single click. They even set up a support website to guide users through the process. “I’d thought if we could just put our music within reach of people, they might choose to reach out toward it,” Bono said later. “Not quite.”

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

The top (bottom?) 10...

10. Billy Squier obliterates his career with one cheesy music video
9. U2 give their new album away for free in iTunes
8. Ja Rule invests in the Fyre Festival
7. Blood, Sweat & Tears do a tour sponsored by the U.S. government at the height of the Vietnam War
6. Kayne West kicks off his “total asshole” era by interrupting Taylor Swift at the VMAs
5. Woodstock Organizers celebrate event’s 30th anniversary with a horrific riot
4. Eric Clapton goes all-in on vaccine conspiracy nonsense
3. Decca Records passes on signing the Beatles
2. Jerry Lee Lewis marries his underage cousin
1. The Rollings Stones hire the Hells Angels as security guards for their rock festival

 

[Peterrrrr]

I agree. Thought the performance was good at the time, still think so rewatching now. Boots was a good live song, lots of energy, well received at the two 360 shows I saw. It's a Frankenstein of a song to be sure, but this live performance of it didn't do them any harm.

Im glad to see that Im not the only one who likes this performance, Im even going onw step further with the oponion that it is one of their more underrated performance of the song.
To me it best version of the track and it sounds a bit messy but in a good way, I like the way Bono performence on the stage and it feels like he wanted the performance to be more than it turn out to be in press reaction.
It felt very ZooTV-Fly-Ish....

 

[MrPryck2U]

The top (bottom?) 10...

10. Billy Squier obliterates his career with one cheesy music video
9. U2 give their new album away for free in iTunes
8. Ja Rule invests in the Fyre Festival
7. Blood, Sweat & Tears do a tour sponsored by the U.S. government at the height of the Vietnam War
6. Kayne West kicks off his “total asshole” era by interrupting Taylor Swift at the VMAs
5. Woodstock Organizers celebrate event’s 30th anniversary with a horrific riot
4. Eric Clapton goes all-in on vaccine conspiracy nonsense
3. Decca Records passes on signing the Beatles
2. Jerry Lee Lewis marries his underage cousin
1. The Rollings Stones hire the Hells Angels as security guards for their rock festival

These are pretty damn good! I could also add a whole list of shit that Michael Jackson did, like: Be allowed to have children sleep over at his house without their parents present. Be allowed to sleep in the same room/bed as said children. Be allowed to build several secret "nooks" on his Neverland Ranch conveniently furnished with a bed, of course, so he could "nap" with said children.

 

[MrPryck2U]

I don't want to derail the thread with my mini MJ rant. I've felt always that the Apple debacle was just a convenient reason for people to hate on U2. I still loved the album and the tour. Several of the tracks are amongst my favorites from the 21st Century era. Every Breaking Wave, Iris, Cedarwood, Reach Around, and Troubles to name a few.

 

[lazarus]

Rant on MJ all you want, I hate that freak. He does have some looney defenders here who I'm sure will show up soon.

At least U2 didn't finish above Kanye, who by now has done far worse than the Taylor Swift interruption--I'd say losing his Adidas contract for being an anti-semite is worse, business wise.

 

[Hewson]

That Billy Squier video was brutal.

 

[Hewson]

 

[MrPryck2U]

Rant on MJ all you want, I hate that freak. He does have some looney defenders here who I'm sure will show up soon.

At least U2 didn't finish above Kanye, who by now has done far worse than the Taylor Swift interruption--I'd say losing his Adidas contract for being an anti-semite is worse, business wise.

Thanks for the reassurance!

As for Kanye, I'm getting concerned with that dude. He needs to get his meds straight because he is on a bad path where the consequences could be deadly.

 

[MrPryck2U]

That Billy Squier video was brutal.

You know what's fucked up? That was my first...exposure to Billy Squier. I was eleven when the video was played on MTV. I really liked the song, but clearly the budget for the video was low. Plus, back in the homophobic 80's, if you wore pink or close to it, you were gay of course.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Rant on MJ all you want, I hate that freak. He does have some looney defenders here who I'm sure will show up soon.

At least U2 didn't finish above Kanye, who by now has done far worse than the Taylor Swift interruption--I'd say losing his Adidas contract for being an anti-semite is worse, business wise.

Well they chose that moment because they deemed it as the start of his "I'm a complete fucking asshole" phase

When future music historians try to pinpoint the exact moment that Kanye West started moving from hero to villain, they’re likely to pinpoint the 2009 MTV Video Music Awards. That’s the night he stormed the stage while Taylor Swift was delivering her Best Female Video acceptance speech for “You Belong to Me.” “Yo, Taylor, I’m really happy for you,” he said. “I’ma let you finish, but Beyoncé had one of the best videos of all time! One of the best videos of all time!” West was thrown out of the show, and even President Obama called him a “jackass” for the stunt. This seems like a minor incident considering all the madness that would follow, but the long, dark, winding road to the Trump hat and “def con 3 on Jewish people” and showing porn to his employees and everything else begins here.

Michael Jackson not making the list for being a pedo is odd now that you mention it.