U2's second chance

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Okay, I admit it. I confess. You are all right. I concocted the whole "doesn't fit on the album" argument as a scapegoat reason for explaining my dislike of SUC, as if just simply stating that SUC isn't very good wouldn't be enough. I also had to lie for no reason at all to a bunch of strangers because I lacked the courage to just say that I don't like the song very much (which i have said anyway). Brilliant work, guys. You've got me! I am a liar and an asshole who fails to understand art.

On with the discussion
 
All fronts meaning songwise and albumwise.

Do I have to repeat that i think CT and GOYB are pretty good songs?

Fuck, too late.

Just pointing out an apparently contradiction. If you don't like the song AND you don't think it belongs on the album... um..... what are we disagreeing about? You seem to fit right in with my theory, boy-wondery telepathy not required....
 
Okay, I admit it. I confess. You are all right. I concocted the whole "doesn't fit on the album" argument as a scapegoat reason for explaining my dislike of SUC, as if just simply stating that SUC isn't very good wouldn't be enough. I also had to lie for no reason at all to a bunch of strangers because I lacked the courage to just say that I don't like the song very much (which i have said anyway). Brilliant work, guys. You've got me! I am a liar and an asshole who fails to understand art.

On with the discussion

I don't recall anyone suggesting this......
 
Just pointing out an apparently contradiction. If you don't like the song AND you don't think it belongs on the album... um..... what are we disagreeing about? You seem to fit right in with my theory, boy-wondery telepathy not required....

If I say that I'd like certain songs more (not gonna name which ones) if they weren't on NLOTH and instead were individual singles, would that still prove your point? Because you're ignoring that part where I say that CT and GOYB sound like good songs, just not songs that belong on NLOTH.
 
If I say that I'd like certain songs more (not gonna name which ones) if they weren't on NLOTH and instead were individual singles, would that still prove your point? Because you're ignoring that part where I say that CT and GOYB sound like good songs, just not songs that belong on NLOTH.

Yeah, but we're not talking about a song that you like even a little bit, are we? Are you saying you'd LIKE it, or just not hate it as much?

In any case, I have concentrated my discussion on this thread to Stand Up Comedy (not GOYB or IGCIIDGCT) because that the one that I was able to make what I thought was such a strong lyrical argument for why it belonged. Also, it seems to be the song that more people have an issue with.

Again, you were never the target of my theory. You might not have fit it even 1% and that would have just meant there was at least one guy who didn't fit. I was only saying that "a lot of posters" seem to fall into it, never "Ozeeko does."
 
None of the tracks on srt.pepper fit on the album. Thats why they all fit. One time a while back, i took the time to listen to all the "trilogys" of u2. Just one set at a time. To be honest, while the TUF-TJT-RAH may have more hits , I found the ATYCLB-HTDAAB-NLOTH flowed together better then any of the 4.
 
None of the tracks on srt.pepper fit on the album. Thats why they all fit. One time a while back, i took the time to listen to all the "trilogys" of u2. Just one set at a time. To be honest, while the TUF-TJT-RAH may have more hits , I found the ATYCLB-HTDAAB-NLOTH flowed together better then any of the 4.

I agree about Sgt. Pepper. Same reason I agree that all the songs on HTDAAB work, for it's a collection of individual songs.

Gotta disagree about JT. Curious...what songs do u think sound out of place?

R&H is a strange scattered affair with new songs and live cuts, not sure u can really compare it to the other "proper" studio albums.

On UF, the one song that kinda feels out of place is Pride, ironically. It's pretty anthemic for that album. However, production-wise it does sound like its coming from the same world.
 
Yeah, but we're not talking about a song that you like even a little bit, are we? Are you saying you'd LIKE it, or just not hate it as much?

In any case, I have concentrated my discussion on this thread to Stand Up Comedy (not GOYB or IGCIIDGCT) because that the one that I was able to make what I thought was such a strong lyrical argument for why it belonged. Also, it seems to be the song that more people have an issue with.

Again, you were never the target of my theory. You might not have fit it even 1% and that would have just meant there was at least one guy who didn't fit. I was only saying that "a lot of posters" seem to fall into it, never "Ozeeko does."

It's safe to say I'd like SUC more if it was part of another type of album. A more HTDAABish kind of album.

NLOTH is a pretty strange album now that i think about it. It's very moody, a lot like UF. I think this is why the 3 songs sound so odd to me. It's like if Two Hearts Beat As One was a song on UF. Imagine The Refugee coming on right after Bad. lol. And then Red Light. And then u get Indian Summer Sky. What an odd trip that would be.
 
Just pointing out an apparently contradiction. If you don't like the song AND you don't think it belongs on the album... um..... what are we disagreeing about? You seem to fit right in with my theory, boy-wondery telepathy not required....

If ABOY's intro were cut into a separate track and reused as the segue between MOS and UC, am I not allowed to think it's both a piece of shit and out of place? SUC isn't a whole lot better in my eyes.
 
If ABOY's intro were cut into a separate track and reused as the segue between MOS and UC, am I not allowed to think it's both a piece of shit and out of place? SUC isn't a whole lot better in my eyes.

Apparently you're only allowed to think something's out of place if you like it. You cannot dislike something and think it out of place at the same time. You have to choose a side. If you choose both sides that means you are blind. That's the theory being put forth here.

But I'm the exception, I think.

BTW, I totally agree with you on the ABOY intro analogy.
 
oh,. i didn't mean tracks didn;t flow together on a specific album. I meant, if you take the tracks from the 00's, and listen to them in random selection , they flow better then any other 3 albums. The joshua tree album flows fine with me, but mix in the other 2 albums and it dosn't work as well as the 00's albums.
 
You and Niceman's argument is comprised of somehow having some kind of mindreading talent, as you both claim to know what goes on in some member's heads. As I've explained repeatedly my reasons for thinking some songs sound out of place, even confessing that i happen to enjoy a couple of them...this gets ignored by you and Niceman apparently because u continue to just chalk it up to, "you just don't like the songs and it's clouding your vision". Forget the other examples i've given of songs I DISLIKE yet think sound fine on a said album. I'm talking about flow and cohesion, while you guys are getting too fixed on just plain liking or disliking a song based solely on the song itself. Two different conversations. Which one would u like to have? I thought the convo about albums was more interesting.

But getting to your question about UC into CT - my gripe, at that moment the album forgets the plot, ceases to be a moody masterpiece, and instead becomes a silly pop romp for 3 songs with the same drivel Bono's been feeding us since 2004. Sounds nothing like 2009 Bono, sounds like Bono from 2004. The BOMB Bono has decided to drop by and visit for 3 songs.

And SUC into F-BB - my gripe, actually it's not a gripe, I'm just pleased to have made it that far to F-BB since SUC was an utter borefest, with the same drivel Bono's been feeding us since 2004. F-BB gets us back on track, the moody masterpiece that is NLOTH the album ensues.

Honestly, remove those 3 tracks, have F-BB pick up where UC left off, the album becomes a pretty sweet ride.

Well, safe to say I was talking about SUC, and not CT and GOYB, thought I made that clear. You said it was pretty bad in all respects....like niceman said, no mind reading there.

I like the convo about the albums better.....

I think we should move on from this too, because obviously we will never agree on 2 things:

1.)Whether or not the flow of 4-5-6-7-8 is disrupted by 5,6 and 7.

2.)Whether or not these songs sound like a completely different era.

I will try and be as coherent as possible with my responses to the above, and then you can reply if you wish and we will have each other's opinions on this, agree to disagree, and move on with a great thread! Like I said in my post agreeing with your JT analysis, I have no interest in turning this in to a dead end personal argument. This thread has been very constructive.

No one is suggesting you have no understanding/appreciation of art, we all understand we are having about the most subjective conversation you can have on here.

1A) No disputing there is a clear shift present when CT starts. However, we are led in, through both theme and sound gradually, having found redemption in UC from the despair and searching in MOS. I don't think CT is all that out of place in this context. CT lyrics keep us going with the theme of space and time and movement through each-"start out the climb" "All the way to the light." Now GOYB gets a little more ironic and lighthearted, but is ultimately a call for people to step out of the shadows, seize the moment and lead us into the future. SUC was close read nicely a few pages back, that was a good analysis of how it fits. I would add that the self deprication is a way of telling us not to take ourselves too seriously as we explore new limits and broaden our "horizon." The end of SUC and the start of F-BB fit well because of the jarring, bass driven loop that is the first sound we hear in Fez.

I guess you can see UC as the start of a journey from despair, CT-SUC as little snippets of advice and truisms as you "start out the climb," "kiss the future," and "cross an 8 line highway on a voyage of discovery." F-BB is where we go from here-picking up the actual journey to Africa.

2A.) You like to use the "production makes it fit" argument for songs on UF and AB. Well I have one for NLOTH. Nothing and more of nothing about CT, GOYB and SUC are produced anything like Bomb. Bomb to me is too compressed, the sounds are muddled, and the drums and bass stand out very little, even on the upbeat songs where they should play a large role. My first impression of CT was "U2 by numbers, but alot of stuff has been fixed since Bomb." There is some great work from Larry and Adam in CT, and though I would not call the track atmospheric, there is much more of a backdrop to it so to speak than Miracle Drug or A Man and a Woman. Finally, this is clearly more U2 does 60s Pop than the straightforward bombast of HTDAAB. Boots, again, where do you get a song with as much going on as this on Bomb? The alternation between bass driven, rapid fire verses, a Beatles like guitar driven chorus, and a complete twist at "let me in the sound." This song is not structured like anything on Bomb. Same goes for SUC, it is completely new ground for U2. Much like Boots, it takes a couple twists and turns but this time, adds in some truly new sounds, especially as far as Edge and Adam are concerned.

CT would never make it on Bomb because it does not fit that production model, and GOYB and SUC have too much going on musically to even be considered in the same sentence as Bomb.
 
If ABOY's intro were cut into a separate track and reused as the segue between MOS and UC, am I not allowed to think it's both a piece of shit and out of place? SUC isn't a whole lot better in my eyes.

The only problem with this is you move from the subjective into the objective here.

Your opinion stops at trying to have your own facts.

It is a fact that nothing on NLOTH sounds even remotely like any part of ABOY, never mind the intro.
 
You cannot dislike something and think it out of place at the same time.

But I'm the exception, I think.

What?

That was the theory that was advanced, that there is a strong correlation between disliking a song and saying it does not fit. All that was done from what I saw in this thread was some highlighting of the fact that most people making the "it does not fit" argument do not like the song very much. No one said that was not allowed, they just pointed out that it may influence someone's opinion on whether it belongs on an album with gems like the title track, Magnificent, Moment of Surrender, etc.

You pointed out how you kind of liked CT and GOYB and disliked SUC, no one came back and said "discussion over, Ozeeko is obviously an uninformed idiot with a lack of appreciation for art." To the contrary, people responded with reasons why they believe that SUC does happen to fit on the album.

No one is dismissing you off hand because you both dislike SUC as a song and find it to be out of place on NLOTH. We have been discussing both points.
 
It is a fact that nothing on NLOTH sounds even remotely like any part of ABOY, never mind the intro.

SUC is Led Zeppelin-inspired, while ABOY was inspired by The Who. Are you certain that your assertion is factual? Because, last I checked, those two bands are quite often compared.

And no, my statement did not lapse into objectivity. Nearly any judgment of quality, even coherence, is inherently subjective.
 
Regarding SUC and CT...
I'm one of those that likes to hear albums from beggining to end. I don't hear beach clips, ever.
Guess I'm old school, but I love to wait untill I have my copy in my hands, and the sweetness of the moment when I open the booklet and read the lyrics as I listen to the album for the first time. It's like a sacred moment, and I create a context where I can put everything on hold and just listen to the album from beggining to end and just try to devote myself to listening to the album the way the artist intended to, as a piece.
After some nights of repeating this experience and having assimilated the album as a piece, I start to come back to the album in different ways. With NLOTH, it took me a couple of days to accept the fact that I had to skip CT and SUC to still like them. Let me explain this: I think CT and SUC are good songs and I like them, but I can't stand them in the context of hearing NLOTH from beggining to end. It's in that context where they don't work, FOR ME.
So every now and then when I don't feel like hearing any of the other songs in NLOTH, I hear CT and SUC individually and I really like them, and then I can't stop hearing them in my head all day and enjoying them as great songs.
As Bram said some time ago, I think GOYB takes extra heat just for being in the middle of those 2, and it suffers from a kind of "sandwich effect" hahahaha...
Hope I make some sense.

yes it makes some sense! It's exactly what I do. I skip the songs when listening to NLOTH as a whole. However, when listening at random songs on my iPod I don't skip them. Good songs, but for the flow of the album they are bothering me.
 
Well, safe to say I was talking about SUC, and not CT and GOYB, thought I made that clear. You said it was pretty bad in all respects....like niceman said, no mind reading there.

I like the convo about the albums better.....

I think we should move on from this too, because obviously we will never agree on 2 things:

1.)Whether or not the flow of 4-5-6-7-8 is disrupted by 5,6 and 7.

2.)Whether or not these songs sound like a completely different era.

I will try and be as coherent as possible with my responses to the above, and then you can reply if you wish and we will have each other's opinions on this, agree to disagree, and move on with a great thread! Like I said in my post agreeing with your JT analysis, I have no interest in turning this in to a dead end personal argument. This thread has been very constructive.

No one is suggesting you have no understanding/appreciation of art, we all understand we are having about the most subjective conversation you can have on here.

1A) No disputing there is a clear shift present when CT starts. However, we are led in, through both theme and sound gradually, having found redemption in UC from the despair and searching in MOS. I don't think CT is all that out of place in this context. CT lyrics keep us going with the theme of space and time and movement through each-"start out the climb" "All the way to the light." Now GOYB gets a little more ironic and lighthearted, but is ultimately a call for people to step out of the shadows, seize the moment and lead us into the future. SUC was close read nicely a few pages back, that was a good analysis of how it fits. I would add that the self deprication is a way of telling us not to take ourselves too seriously as we explore new limits and broaden our "horizon." The end of SUC and the start of F-BB fit well because of the jarring, bass driven loop that is the first sound we hear in Fez.

I guess you can see UC as the start of a journey from despair, CT-SUC as little snippets of advice and truisms as you "start out the climb," "kiss the future," and "cross an 8 line highway on a voyage of discovery." F-BB is where we go from here-picking up the actual journey to Africa.

2A.) You like to use the "production makes it fit" argument for songs on UF and AB. Well I have one for NLOTH. Nothing and more of nothing about CT, GOYB and SUC are produced anything like Bomb. Bomb to me is too compressed, the sounds are muddled, and the drums and bass stand out very little, even on the upbeat songs where they should play a large role. My first impression of CT was "U2 by numbers, but alot of stuff has been fixed since Bomb." There is some great work from Larry and Adam in CT, and though I would not call the track atmospheric, there is much more of a backdrop to it so to speak than Miracle Drug or A Man and a Woman. Finally, this is clearly more U2 does 60s Pop than the straightforward bombast of HTDAAB. Boots, again, where do you get a song with as much going on as this on Bomb? The alternation between bass driven, rapid fire verses, a Beatles like guitar driven chorus, and a complete twist at "let me in the sound." This song is not structured like anything on Bomb. Same goes for SUC, it is completely new ground for U2. Much like Boots, it takes a couple twists and turns but this time, adds in some truly new sounds, especially as far as Edge and Adam are concerned.

CT would never make it on Bomb because it does not fit that production model, and GOYB and SUC have too much going on musically to even be considered in the same sentence as Bomb.

Cool, now we're having a discussion.

It seems we were both not connecting our points before. I was taking all U2 songs into consideration, and you guys were focusing only on SUC. You didn't realize and I didn't realize, hence my frustration and sarcastic replies. I was getting frustrated because I was really trying to explain what i meant and i felt like it was getting ignored all in the name of some subjective battle over a song that some people liked and some didn't. Apparently this wasn't the case, we were just not hearing each other right, and it's all fine now that I understand what went wrong.

(plus, I wasn't suggesting that you or anyone else thought i was an "asshole who doesn't understand art". I was just at a loss, having argued my case at that point for like the 10th time. I was sick of explaining and i let some sarcasm slip, which sometimes doesn't translate well on a message board.)

As for the 3 songs, I see what you mean taking the lyrics into consideration. Looked at from a certain angle I can see how you think they fit.

My problem has more to do with the way they sound, and the attitude and spirit in which they are delivered, and yes also the lyrics themselves.

It's as simple as this: it's like Bono from HTDAAB stopped by for 3 songs on NLOTH.

It's about the songs' personalities. Bono is pretty absent on NLOTH. He sings from a character's perspective. It's less of a Bono album. That is, until CT starts and up until SUC ends. In between those bookends you get Bono speaking universally, giving us all optimistic advice, commenting on the state of the world from a "Bono" perspective, not a "character" perspective. It's like the album shifts from fiction to nonfiction. From a character study to an autobiography. But also, beyond the lyrics, there is that very lighthearted approach, borderline corny attitude left over from HTDAAB. Not to say that there isn't any room for fun on NLOTH, I just think something more in keeping with the main album's tone and attitude rather than just a complete break in tone. Which is why I was giving examples of Mysterious Ways and Ultraviolet, two songs that ease the tension while also having a dark underbelly.

I think GOYB comes closest to belonging on the album. The one thing I gotta disagree on is the assessment that it's nothing like Vertigo. I think you haveto forgo all logic and knowledge of music theory and look at it in a more simplistic manner. It's got a trashy, glam riff, a circular bassline that rises and falls in a manner quite like Vertigo, Bono speak-sings the verses much like how he does in Vertigo, and it has a very rockist attitude like in Vertigo. But if you don't hear that, it's all good. It's just that it's so obvious to me. Plus, once again, lyrically it is less a character song and more about Bono.

But you've heard it all before from me. We can agree to disagree. Was just out to prove that sometimes certain songs sound off on an album, regardless of liking or not liking them when taken individualy.
 
If ABOY's intro were cut into a separate track and reused as the segue between MOS and UC, am I not allowed to think it's both a piece of shit and out of place? SUC isn't a whole lot better in my eyes.

Can you say non-sequetor?

You don't like the track and think it doesn't belong, that's all. Some feel otherwise.
 
SUC is Led Zeppelin-inspired

I'm glad you brought this up, Lemon-Melon--I was thinking about this comparison earlier for two reasons (one having to do with the song not fitting and the other with it simply not being a very good song):

1) I think the statement above is quite obviously true. Also true is that NLOTH as an album would never ever draw a comparison to Led Zeppelin, at least not in the sense of bluesy-funk, riff-heavy songs. So in addition to having production that seems out of place on NLOTH, this song sounds musically out of place on the album.

2) Listen to Led Zeppelin 2 front to back and then listen to SUC. It should become readily apparent that U2 should never have gone here (meaning to this kind of music/sound) unless they brought their A game. I.e. unless SUC was one of the very best songs they'd written for this the album. By pretty much any useful indicator (fan response, not being played live, not coming together well in the studio) this is one of the lesser songs on the album, if not the very worst. Since we've been labeling people exceptions to the rule lately, I'll just say that if you disagree that's fine, but you're the exception in the same way you would be if you claimed Grace or Red Light were great U2 tracks.
 
It is one of U2's lesser songs for me. But I can still enjoy it and that's what I like about U2.
 
i've been hoping for u2 do what lou reed and neil young did and release a album of nothing but feedback.
 
By pretty much any useful indicator (fan response, not being played live, not coming together well in the studio) this is one of the lesser songs on the album, if not the very worst. Since we've been labeling people exceptions to the rule lately, I'll just say that if you disagree that's fine, but you're the exception in the same way you would be if you claimed Grace or Red Light were great U2 tracks.

:yippie:
I'm exceptional!!! :dance:


(I do think that Red Light is one of U2's worst songs though)
 
Cool, now we're having a discussion.

It seems we were both not connecting our points before. I was taking all U2 songs into consideration, and you guys were focusing only on SUC. You didn't realize and I didn't realize, hence my frustration and sarcastic replies. I was getting frustrated because I was really trying to explain what i meant and i felt like it was getting ignored all in the name of some subjective battle over a song that some people liked and some didn't. Apparently this wasn't the case, we were just not hearing each other right, and it's all fine now that I understand what went wrong.

(plus, I wasn't suggesting that you or anyone else thought i was an "asshole who doesn't understand art". I was just at a loss, having argued my case at that point for like the 10th time. I was sick of explaining and i let some sarcasm slip, which sometimes doesn't translate well on a message board.)

No problems. I have been guilty of the same misunderstanding, jumping to conclusions, taking things the wrong way, etc as much or more than anyone else here!

As for the 3 songs, I see what you mean taking the lyrics into consideration. Looked at from a certain angle I can see how you think they fit.

My problem has more to do with the way they sound, and the attitude and spirit in which they are delivered, and yes also the lyrics themselves.

It's as simple as this: it's like Bono from HTDAAB stopped by for 3 songs on NLOTH.

It's about the songs' personalities. Bono is pretty absent on NLOTH. He sings from a character's perspective. It's less of a Bono album. That is, until CT starts and up until SUC ends. In between those bookends you get Bono speaking universally, giving us all optimistic advice, commenting on the state of the world from a "Bono" perspective, not a "character" perspective. It's like the album shifts from fiction to nonfiction. From a character study to an autobiography. But also, beyond the lyrics, there is that very lighthearted approach, borderline corny attitude left over from HTDAAB. Not to say that there isn't any room for fun on NLOTH, I just think something more in keeping with the main album's tone and attitude rather than just a complete break in tone. Which is why I was giving examples of Mysterious Ways and Ultraviolet, two songs that ease the tension while also having a dark underbelly.

I think GOYB comes closest to belonging on the album. The one thing I gotta disagree on is the assessment that it's nothing like Vertigo. I think you haveto forgo all logic and knowledge of music theory and look at it in a more simplistic manner. It's got a trashy, glam riff, a circular bassline that rises and falls in a manner quite like Vertigo, Bono speak-sings the verses much like how he does in Vertigo, and it has a very rockist attitude like in Vertigo. But if you don't hear that, it's all good. It's just that it's so obvious to me. Plus, once again, lyrically it is less a character song and more about Bono.

But you've heard it all before from me. We can agree to disagree. Was just out to prove that sometimes certain songs sound off on an album, regardless of liking or not liking them when taken individualy.

I understand what you are saying. Bono clearly makes a 1st person, general cliche throwing comeback when we go from UC into CT. I guess where we can differ is on whether we think it overly disrupts the atmosphere, which we do, and we have both explained why and that's what it's all about!

I would not disagree that Vertigo and GOYB are very similar in many aspects. They're the aspects that you mentioned- the rapid speak sing, the bass driven verses and the overall attitude. Where I see the big differences are in the layered production of GOYB, the innovative pre-chorus/chorus structure and the twists the song takes, especially at "let me in the sound." It is structured differently, though I CERTAINLY hear the Vertigo similarities at many parts of the song.

I think you brought up a very interesting point about character vs 1st person narrative in Bono's lyrics.

I think we should discuss that further on here. Bono has written inspired by 1st person experiences for years- I Will Follow, An Cat Dubh, Bad, One Tree Hill, Running To Standstill, Lemon, MOFO, Kite- but it seems that the quality has gone down with this method since the Bomb era(though I love Sometimes).

What I have said in past posts in this thread and elsewhere is that if U2 want to get back to hit making and mass appeal and being able to speak to so many different situations in life, then they should ditch the Rubin sessions and simply go back and listen to Boy through AB with a specific focus on War, UF,JT and AB.

I have been criticized for this as someone who just wants to go back in time, and I say absolutely not. No need to remake JT, just a need to get back in the mindset that had them writing songs from a 1st and character standpoint that were huge but not dumbed down or cliched.

They should experiment further with the character writing they used to great effect on NLOTH, MOS, UC, Fez, Cedars, etc further as well. However, it does seem that they are misreading the sentiment out there slightly and looking to tunes like WITS as a model. I like WITS, but if U2 wants to look to the past and not compromise on quality, than they need not look to the midpoint between ATYCLB and Bomb.

IGC, Trip, Ultraviolet, MW, Even....Real Thing, ASOH, Pride, I could go on and on about how great they have been without the corny songwriting we see in songs like Miracle Drug, New York, ABOY, etc.
 
SUC is Led Zeppelin-inspired, while ABOY was inspired by The Who. Are you certain that your assertion is factual? Because, last I checked, those two bands are quite often compared.

And no, my statement did not lapse into objectivity. Nearly any judgment of quality, even coherence, is inherently subjective.

Seriously?

I was not around then, but everything I have heard from my parents' generation is back in h.s./college, the jocks liked The Who and the stoners liked Zeppelin.

Oversimplification, but it was pretty much an either or. They get compared because they were the 2 giants of an era.

Unless you really want to argue that the 2 bands sound anything alike on more than a few isolated occasions.......

That, I would imagine, would be extremely difficult.

ABOY and SUC could not sound any more different, nor could the Who and Zeppelin for that matter.

SUC has some Oasis and Chili Peppers influence in there too.

Bottom line, whatever its merits, it's nothing like anything on Bomb.
 
Back
Top Bottom