Daniel Lanois weighs in on SOI/Apple

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Ordinary Love would never be part of a U2 masterpiece. It's not bad, but there's no energy in it at all. I don't miss it. Leaving Invisible off was a poor choice.


I'm with you on both points here.



Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
I listen to Pop all the way through about as often as any other U2 album. There are some less than great tracks, but there's enough of a soul-searching lyrical thread carrying through the record to make it feel complete despite some musical inconsistencies.

Ordinary Love would never be part of a U2 masterpiece. It's not bad, but there's no energy in it at all. I don't miss it. Leaving Invisible off was a poor choice.

So I have a theory that the reaction acoustic Ordinary Love got on Fallon and the Oscars is what led them to the whole they have to be able to be played acoustically if they're going to be good thing.

They were unsure of the material... even more unsure when neither Ordinary Love or Invisible really did anything... and the all of a sudden Ordinary Love makes a little move after that acoustic performance.

Next thing you know there's no album, tedder and epworth are on board, danger mouse is no where to be seen, and we have songs songs songs songs.

Just a hunch.
 
Which is really sad because Ordinary Love, in any incarnation, is among U2's least interesting (i.e. boring) songs.

I hate to use the word, but if what you're describing actually occurred, it's pretty pathetic to attempt to pander in that way.
 
I think OL's chorus is one of the best choruses they came up with during the SOI sessions. Lyrically the chorus is strong too, for me anyway, bc Bono is not trying too hard.

But then, those verses....ugh, opposite of what was said up there ^
 
Not as good as Pop? Fortunately not :) When was the last time you´ve listened to Playboy Mansion, Miami, MOFO studio version? The album just doesn´t work. Even the songs are not as good as they thought.

I still like all 3 of those of those songs, MOFO, studio version, is borderline all time U2 top 10 for me. If anything it's a couple of the singles, Last Night (studio) and If God Will send his Angels that were a tad disappointing, for me anyway.

I really like SOI but I think in spite of some minor weak links, Pop is that bit more powerful and weirdly cohesive.
 
I listen to Pop all the way through about as often as any other U2 album. There are some less than great tracks, but there's enough of a soul-searching lyrical thread carrying through the record to make it feel complete despite some musical inconsistencies.

Ordinary Love would never be part of a U2 masterpiece. It's not bad, but there's no energy in it at all. I don't miss it. Leaving Invisible off was a poor choice.

The omission of Invisible does seem like a terrible mistake, it really would have brought SOI together, it would have made either a great opener or track 2. In hindsight it's a real shame they gave it away free on Apple all those months before as the perceived public indifference must have scared them into not including it.
 
Ordinary Love - such an underrated song. Possibly their best pop song ever. It is so catchy, the hook is perfect, it sounds like it came together so naturally. If I compare it to Stuck, Magnificient or Sweetest Thing...well, it is incomparable.
 
The Epworth mix of Ordinary Love is great. The other version is a bit boring, but decent.
In fact, the Epworth mix may have worked great as the opener to SOI had it not been released on the Mandela movie.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
The omission of Invisible does seem like a terrible mistake, it really would have brought SOI together, it would have made either a great opener or track 2. In hindsight it's a real shame they gave it away free on Apple all those months before as the perceived public indifference must have scared them into not including it.

Their fear of commercial failure inhibits their artistic success.
 
Which is really sad because Ordinary Love, in any incarnation, is among U2's least interesting (i.e. boring) songs.

I hate to use the word, but if what you're describing actually occurred, it's pretty pathetic to attempt to pander in that way.

I would strongly disagree with your assessment of the song... but I know I'm in the minority here.
 
So I have a theory that the reaction acoustic Ordinary Love got on Fallon and the Oscars is what led them to the whole they have to be able to be played acoustically if they're going to be good thing.

They were unsure of the material... even more unsure when neither Ordinary Love or Invisible really did anything... and the all of a sudden Ordinary Love makes a little move after that acoustic performance.


My theory is that the promo tour was mostly acoustic because of the response they got OL acoustic on Jimmy and the Oscars. I also think parts of the album were redone to fit an acoustic mold.

And I also think the idea for OL acoustic on Jimmy was born out of the response Bono and Edge got from their acoustic performances over the last few years including the Clinton thing where they did A Man and A Woman, and the Letterman couch performance of Stuck In a Moment.
 
My theory is that the promo tour was mostly acoustic because of the response they got OL acoustic on Jimmy and the Oscars. I also think parts of the album were redone to fit an acoustic mold.

And I also think the idea for OL acoustic on Jimmy was born out of the response Bono and Edge got from their acoustic performances over the last few years including the Clinton thing where they did A Man and A Woman, and the Letterman couch performance of Stuck In a Moment.

I think they've been bent on this songs translating to acoustic thing for awhile.
 
Back
Top Bottom