wished U2 was a little bit like The Boss

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

phommel

Refugee
Joined
Nov 18, 2000
Messages
1,788
Location
Roermond, Netherlands
Without really complaining. and I know I shouldn't compare...U2 is U2 and that's the way it is...and I know I will be happy after waiting 4,5 years next spring....

But hearing the good news of my other all time favourite Bruce springsteen, I couldn't help to think that I wished U2 was a little bit more like Bruce. The man is almost 60 and look at this:

albums:
2002: The Rising
2005: Devils and Dust
2006: The Seeger Sessions
2007: Magic
2009: Working On A Dream (Jan 27)

tours:
2003: The Rising Tour
2005: Devils & Dust Tour
2006: Seeger Sessions Tour
2007: Magic Tour
2009: Short European/American Tour

5 albums and 5 tours in one decade!!!! O saw him in 2005, 2006 and 2007 in 3 different tours. How amazing was that?
 
It's probably a little easier when you have only one person in the creative process...

That being said, I know there are plenty of bands that put out albums much quicker than U2, but hey that's U2 they've been this way a long time.
 
what did Springsteen release in the 90s?

Human Touch and Lucky Town were released simultaneously in 1992 (and are not regarded as his better albums, to say the least), and then The Ghost of Tom Joad was released in ... 1995?
 
It is nice to see Bruce getting more prolific as he gets older. I believe this is the most albums released in one decade for him to date. Wish I could say the same for U2.
 
U2 released 6 albums in the 80's :tongue: :D .

Boy - 1980
October - 1981
War - 1983
The Unforgettable Fire - 1984
The Joshua Tree - 1987
Rattle And Hum - 1988

Really I am joking, U2's work rate is sooooo slow since the year 2000,
3 albums in 10 years is way too slow,

Bono's interview w/Ronnie Wood comes to mind!
Bono: "we spent 5 months making The Joshua Tree, its way too long!, I dont wanna spend that much time in the studio again!" :tsk:

I guess Bono's humanatarian work really does interfere with the band.


NOBODY COMPARES TO THE BOSS FOR WORK RATE AND GIVING 100% NIGHT AFTER NIGHT! :rockon: :bow:
 
In productivity, I do wish they were more like Bruce...that is rather impressive to put out albums that frequently at his age; but thank goodness they are not like him musically. Other artists that have had an influence on U2 are typically artists that I would never listen to. So, I could use the silly defense that Bruce is just putting out albums and doing what he does naturally; while U2 are pushing themselves hard and taking the time to produce an original, innovative work and at this point in their career (with 11 albums under their belts) it is probably increasingly difficult to not sound like U2 or fall into a creative slump. Then again, I haven't heard much of the Boss's recent work at all and maybe he's doing some reinvention, too; but based on what I've heard of his, he almost always sounds like Bruce Springsteen or like you'd expect him to sound. Like I said, I'm not familiar enough to really back that defense 100%.
 
Aw, c'mon, it's not a fair comparison at all. From the time they started promoting HTDAAB, till the time the tour was over was well over two years. During the touring gap in 06, they also worked on Window In The Skies and Saints, as well as doing promotional work and appearances related to those songs and the greatest hits package. Then there was the movie. I'm sure I'm leaving a ton of stuff out, too. It's hardly as if they've been taking it easy for the past 4 years. They've been very visible, out there working on a lot of things.
 
Well maybe they should stop with all this silly extra stuff and focus on the music. Seriously. :grumpy:
 
Aw, c'mon, it's not a fair comparison at all. From the time they started promoting HTDAAB, till the time the tour was over was well over two years. During the touring gap in 06, they also worked on Window In The Skies and Saints, as well as doing promotional work and appearances related to those songs and the greatest hits package. Then there was the movie. I'm sure I'm leaving a ton of stuff out, too. It's hardly as if they've been taking it easy for the past 4 years. They've been very visible, out there working on a lot of things.

Yep v true!

not to forget.........

Live 8 &
It Might Get Loud {due for release summer 09}
 
Bruce has only released three albums of original material so far this decade, with one coming up in '09 bringing the (likely) final count to four.

Basically, you're asking U2 to release a new album every two years or so. Fine, who wouldn't want to aspire to such grand ambitions?
 
Well maybe they should stop with all this silly extra stuff and focus on the music. Seriously. :grumpy:

What exactly do you mean with "silly extra stuff"?

And I LOVE LOVE LOVE Bruce, still I think whoever mentioned earlier in this thread that it's easier for a solo artist is right, IMO. Bruce is a solo artist, after all, even if he's playing with the E Street Band so often, you cannot compare this to a band like U2.
 
what did Springsteen release in the 90s?

No need to think, you proved the opposite of this thread's fact. I'll answer as a U2 & Springsteen fan. And I do leave his side contributions out:

- Human Touch (1992)
- Lucky Town (1992, a double album with the afore mentioned one (!))
- Tougher Than The Rest (1992, Live Material from the '88 Tour)
- In Concert: MTV Plugged (1993)
- Philadelphia, OST – Streets Of Philadelphia (1994)
- Greatest Hits (1995, with four new/new recorded tracks)
- The Ghost Of Tom Joad (1995)
- Dead Man Walking, OST – Dead Man Walking (1996)
- Missing (1997, Single)
- Tracks (1998, Box Set with some new recorded stuff)
- 18 Tracks (1999), Extract from the Box Set with some new recorded stuff)

... not bad for a guy, who then pushed out even a lot more in in the 2000s, while touring nearly constantly, hm? And whatever might be said here regarding my favourite rock band from Ireland – they are a lot lazier regarding studio work, production & output, a lot slower, whatever you call it, than the Boss. By the way, U2 would be the first ones to admit this ...
 
i didn't really meant to prove any point
perhaps that I god honestly had no clue what Springsteen did in the 90s
do any of his fans look back with warm memories at this decade?
actually, i'm sure there are some who do
but in the public conscience he was just about invisible for a decade and what he did produce was mediocre by his standards

of course U2 are 'lazy' in comparison to Springsteen
hell, they're 'lazy' in comparison to just about anyone
but they also have different objectives than just about any other band out there

perhaps when U2 come to the point where they really feel there's nothing left to prove they will increase their output
more likely though U2 will never reach this stage because - as has been pointed out - all 4 members need to feel this way and need to be satisfied with whatever they release
 
Everyone works at their own pace, and obviously Bruce is making up a bit for lost time given that he produced so relatively little original material in the 90's (given that the guy was newly married with children, he deserved a bit of a break).

Honestly, I think we're overstating the gap between albums here. U2 finished their tour just in 2006 and obviously given Edge's daughter's health problems, the last thing on their minds was getting back into the studio. So really, they've only been working full-time on this new recording for a little over two years (counting the Rubin sessions).

The only way that I wish U2 would emulate the Boss is in the variety of setlists.
 
In productivity, I do wish they were more like Bruce...that is rather impressive to put out albums that frequently at his age; but thank goodness they are not like him musically. Other artists that have had an influence on U2 are typically artists that I would never listen to. So, I could use the silly defense that Bruce is just putting out albums and doing what he does naturally; while U2 are pushing themselves hard and taking the time to produce an original, innovative work and at this point in their career (with 11 albums under their belts) it is probably increasingly difficult to not sound like U2 or fall into a creative slump. Then again, I haven't heard much of the Boss's recent work at all and maybe he's doing some reinvention, too; but based on what I've heard of his, he almost always sounds like Bruce Springsteen or like you'd expect him to sound. Like I said, I'm not familiar enough to really back that defense 100%.

Devils and Dust solo tour in 2005. Seeger Sessions tour in 2006. E Street band 2007 - now. Saw him three years/tours in a row and it was a completely different type of show each time. I think he varies what he does more then most artists.
 
<snip>
- Tougher Than The Rest (1992, Live Material from the '88 Tour)

What was this? A single? I haven't heard of that one.

- Philadelphia, OST – Streets Of Philadelphia (1994)
- Dead Man Walking, OST – Dead Man Walking (1996)

For clarification, he only contributed one song to these soundtracks though, not all tracks.

With that same logic, this would then U2's output be in this decade:
- The Million Dollar Hotel, O.S.T.
- All That You Can't Leave Behind
- The Best Of 1990-2000 (with 2 new songs and 4 newly mixed/recorded songs)
- How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb
- 18 Singles (with 1 new song and 1 new recorded cover)
- The Joshua Tree (deluxe edition with some new recorded stuff)
- War (deluxe edition with some new recorded stuff)
Plus some stuff (covers) for various tribute albums and soundtracks.

Doesn't look too bad either.
 
Back
Top Bottom