Excerpt from the new RS article, "U2: Hymns For the Future" about "Winter" vs Singles

[rihannsu]

This fiction that U2 didn't try to make hits really should be corrected. WOWY almost got ditched from the album completely and it was only because Gavin restructured the song and convinced them that it would be a hit that they continued with it. I think Flanagan talks about how they spent months trying to get WGRYWH right to make it a hit and just were never satisfied with it. Edge estimated that 60% of the time spent on JT was devoted to Streets (granted that was his personal idea of the perfect U2 live song). The trick is trying to balance between making a song accessible enough to puncture the pop conciousness but different enough to still challenge and stretch the listeners. I don't really think that they are doing anything differently than they have before but both the musical landscape and the frame of reference have changed. While you could argue that before JT they didn't try to make singles I could argue right back that the reason they did that was they didn't want to be known as a singles band, not that they didn't appreciate the value of a single. The early years were spent building the live audience so that their continued survival would not hinge on whether or not they had a hit single. Once they had established themselves they had no qualms about doing their very best to make some hits. The problem now is more that U2 are carrying a ridiculous amount of baggage and getting past people preconcieved ideas of U2 and Bono and of what is expected given their age and the length of their career is nearly impossible. Reviews of this album do more to tell you the mindset of the reviewer than they do to tell you about the album. The descriptions are so wildly different it begs you to wonder if there are multiple alternative versions of the album. The only thing that is clear is that what they hear on NLOTH is based on what their preconceptions are and the reviewers capable of truly hearing the album are few and far between. You can pratically map out what section of the U2 fanbase/or not fan base the reviewer belongs too by which songs they like and which they trash or what lyrics they think are brilliant and what they think stinks. They is no concensus of opinion really except for Magnificent which even the haters think will be a massive hit. U2 made a record that has something for everyone but the key to seeing the true beauty of it is to accept all aspects of U2.

Dana

 

[ny_atom]

^^^

You nailed the proverbial nail on the proverbial head. Thanks for that post.

 

[Irvine511]

This fiction that U2 didn't try to make hits really should be corrected. WOWY almost got ditched from the album completely and it was only because Gavin restructured the song and convinced them that it would be a hit that they continued with it. I think Flanagan talks about how they spent months trying to get WGRYWH right to make it a hit and just were never satisfied with it. Edge estimated that 60% of the time spent on JT was devoted to Streets (granted that was his personal idea of the perfect U2 live song). The trick is trying to balance between making a song accessible enough to puncture the pop conciousness but different enough to still challenge and stretch the listeners. I don't really think that they are doing anything differently than they have before but both the musical landscape and the frame of reference have changed. While you could argue that before JT they didn't try to make singles I could argue right back that the reason they did that was they didn't want to be known as a singles band, not that they didn't appreciate the value of a single. The early years were spent building the live audience so that their continued survival would not hinge on whether or not they had a hit single. Once they had established themselves they had no qualms about doing their very best to make some hits. The problem now is more that U2 are carrying a ridiculous amount of baggage and getting past people preconcieved ideas of U2 and Bono and of what is expected given their age and the length of their career is nearly impossible. Reviews of this album do more to tell you the mindset of the reviewer than they do to tell you about the album. The descriptions are so wildly different it begs you to wonder if there are multiple alternative versions of the album. The only thing that is clear is that what they hear on NLOTH is based on what their preconceptions are and the reviewers capable of truly hearing the album are few and far between. You can pratically map out what section of the U2 fanbase/or not fan base the reviewer belongs too by which songs they like and which they trash or what lyrics they think are brilliant and what they think stinks. They is no concensus of opinion really except for Magnificent which even the haters think will be a massive hit. U2 made a record that has something for everyone but the key to seeing the true beauty of it is to accept all aspects of U2.

Dana

thank you.

i'm so sick of the "pop kids" smugness that reeks from so many posts in here. all i see is a load of self-congratulatory masturbation and the total misunderstanding of what the Achtung/Zooropa/Pop years were all about.

we have a genuinely complex, slippery, not-easily-categorized album on our hands. you don't have to love it. you don't have to like it. but i think you're doing everyone and especially yourself a disservice if you listen only to compare this album to past albums, which is what many critics have done.

 

[Rachel D.]

Who cares if they are making an effort to produce hit singles or not? If the music is good, then they have succeeded, and it probably will be a hit.

 

[Earnie Shavers]

Does this sound like the mix we've heard?

No, it actually doesn't. Unless they’re light notes fleshed out later on, and the memory of order/placement of different parts of the song has been jumbled up in the final write up. Wouldn’t be the first time we’ve had a mixed up but accurate description of the song. Still, it’s quite different. I guess it’s highly likely that the version on the film isn’t the latest one, but is just the one from whenever he started putting it together. They only gave him the updates for the others (being the finished versions - obviously).

 

[Muldfeld]

Muldfeld, do you really think Fez-Being Born or Moment Of Surrender or White As Snow or Cedars Of Lebanon or even Unknown Caller or the title track were made to be hits? There's only a few songs on NLOTH that sound like they were designed to be radio hits.

I don't like the idea of U2 dumbing down their music any more than anyone else does, but I think you can only really make that argument for Bomb.

ATYCLB was a different style from what they had been doing in the 90s, for sure, and I definitely think all three 90s albums are better, but Beautiful Day wasn't dumbing anything down, it was just a return to an anthemic style and a return to guitar chiming. It isn't any more "dumbed down" than Pride(In The Name Of Love) or Desire were. U2's forays into pop music may not be everyone's cup of tea, but Stuck In A Moment is catchy song and one of the best pop songs they've ever written. I actually love Kite, In A Little While, and When I Look At The World a lot too. You can put Kite in a setlist between All I Want Is You and One Tree Hill and it fits perfectly, there's no loss of quality. In A Little While is a soulful pop song, especially the live versions on the Elevation Tour. It has a really great rhythm. When I Look At The World has some Eno soundscapes in and one of Edge's best moments of the decade with its minisolo, and the lyrics are some of my favorite recent U2 lyrics as well. And don't forget that the brilliant The Ground Beneath Her Feet was the bonus track outside of the US.

As for NLOTH, the title track and Fez-Being Born have more adventurous spirit in them than perhaps anything U2 have done since Pop. Moment Of Surrender is one of the best songs they've done this decade and one of Bono's best vocals in nearly two decades. White As Snow is beautiful. Breathe is perhaps one of the two or three best rock songs the band has done this decade. And Cedars Of Lebanon is a great atmospheric closer(though I can't put it in the same category as Love Is Blindness or Wake Up Dead Man). I don't yet think this album is in their top 5, but it's a lot closer than Bomb.

Oh, I should add that I haven't heard the album yet; only GOYB, and I mostly agree with you on ATYCLB and that I'm much upset about that album in the context of it being followed up by HTDAAB. Still, "Walk On" is insulting in its simplicity -- melodically and lyrically -- except for the part following the crappy guitar solo until the end. Pride sounds so much more different and better to me; ditto Desire. I just can't stand Beautiful Day and the video with the pretty teens making out in the most tongue smacking way makes me sick. Stuck in a Moment is a brilliant song, but the football player video is embarrassing. The Walk On video is pretty terrible, too, especially with all the kids looking up; it was like something this Canadian band (and all commercial Canadian bands who follow it as a template) Our Lady Peace would do.
YouTube - Our Lady Peace - Innocent [OFFICIAL MUSIC VIDEO]

Anyway, I suppose the videos are aside, but they are a marked dumbing down from the band's more artistic approaches before. I'm not a huge fan of the song, but Stay is a beautiful video.

 

[Muldfeld]

Does this sound like the mix we've heard?

It might not be because the version on the DVD is from the summer, at the latest, because that's from where Corbijn took it. Eno may have continued to work on it when the Rolling Stone guy was interviewing him in December.

 

[Muldfeld]

I've said this before and I'll say it again, U2 need to shed their "niceness". I think after 9/11, for some reason the band got in into their heads that from now on their music is meant to save people, to stop people from being depressed. And this whole new "savior complex" was born. So on an album like NLOTH, we have the obligatory savior tracks, as in CT, GOYB, SUC and Breathe. Songs in which were told to stand up and fight and not worry because our love is going to conquer all. U2 were never this cheesy. During the 80's Bono only saved this shit for his on stage speeches, but the songs didn't display any desire to save humanity, it simply just depicted the times. I think Walk On's association with 9/11 brought this all on. It's like U2 can't release an album unless they put the token savior songs somewhere on the record. Once they get over this shit then we can start to hear some really great U2 again. Luckily, I can hear greatness in more than half of NLOTH. It's when Bono starts preaching to me to stand up and sing my heart out that i start to cringe. Maybe it's just a personal preference, but I don't need someone telling me how i should feel, i'd rather be given a glimpse into how the ARTIST is feeling. That's what art is supposed to be anyway.

"Savior complex tracks". Your explanation perfectly sums up what I've been feeling about the band. Bono talks about how you can't fake joy. Well if anyone believes this side of U2, I guess people can. I, for one, find it so forced, as well. Well said!

 

[Diemen]

Oh, I should add that I haven't heard the album yet;

I just feel this should be emphasized when reading Muldfeld's opinions.

 

[LemonMelon]

It's almost like the band would prize Vertigo over The Fly. In fact Bono said in a 2005 interview with Rolling Stone that he thinks ATYCLB and HTDAAB might have better songs than Achtung Baby, but he only favors the latter for its thematic cohesiveness; is he bonkers?

Maybe he was lying.

 

[Diemen]

"Savior complex tracks". Your explanation perfectly sums up what I've been feeling about the band. Bono talks about how you can't fake joy. Well if anyone believes this side of U2, I guess people can. I, for one, find it so forced, as well. Well said!

You seem particularly bent on the idea that U2 are somehow not being themselves, and that really they are some purely artistically-minded group that has been led astray. U2 have always, always wanted to be a big band, always wanted to have hits on the radio, and always wanted to be relevant. How you've formed it in your mind that they haven't or that there was a point in time when they were only in it for the "art" (dark, brooding art, I should say, as apparently joyous art isn't art in your eyes) is beyond me.

 

[maycocksean]

This fiction that U2 didn't try to make hits really should be corrected. WOWY almost got ditched from the album completely and it was only because Gavin restructured the song and convinced them that it would be a hit that they continued with it. I think Flanagan talks about how they spent months trying to get WGRYWH right to make it a hit and just were never satisfied with it. Edge estimated that 60% of the time spent on JT was devoted to Streets (granted that was his personal idea of the perfect U2 live song). The trick is trying to balance between making a song accessible enough to puncture the pop conciousness but different enough to still challenge and stretch the listeners. I don't really think that they are doing anything differently than they have before but both the musical landscape and the frame of reference have changed. While you could argue that before JT they didn't try to make singles I could argue right back that the reason they did that was they didn't want to be known as a singles band, not that they didn't appreciate the value of a single. The early years were spent building the live audience so that their continued survival would not hinge on whether or not they had a hit single. Once they had established themselves they had no qualms about doing their very best to make some hits. The problem now is more that U2 are carrying a ridiculous amount of baggage and getting past people preconcieved ideas of U2 and Bono and of what is expected given their age and the length of their career is nearly impossible. Reviews of this album do more to tell you the mindset of the reviewer than they do to tell you about the album. The descriptions are so wildly different it begs you to wonder if there are multiple alternative versions of the album. The only thing that is clear is that what they hear on NLOTH is based on what their preconceptions are and the reviewers capable of truly hearing the album are few and far between. You can pratically map out what section of the U2 fanbase/or not fan base the reviewer belongs too by which songs they like and which they trash or what lyrics they think are brilliant and what they think stinks. They is no concensus of opinion really except for Magnificent which even the haters think will be a massive hit. U2 made a record that has something for everyone but the key to seeing the true beauty of it is to accept all aspects of U2.

Dana

Brilliant summation!

 

[nathan1977]

U2 held the belief even early on that one great song would save you years of trying to build a following. They had that in "I Will Follow," which was the song that really built interest in them early-on (in the US at least). They have always worked hardest at the songs they believe will break them. There was a fair amount of tension surrounding the creation of "I Will Follow" -- Bono imagined the guitar sound one way and Edge wouldn't/couldn't reproduce it until Bono did it himself. "Pride" was the song that broke them even bigger, and that was another labor of love -- they recorded and re-recorded the song both at Slane Castle and at Windmill Lane. It was the one they believed in, but it also took a lot of work. (Ironically, "Bad" was probably the song that did even better for them, but I think that was strictly because of the Live Aid associations.)

As a result, this notion that U2 doesn't care about singles and has never cared is silly. And particularly in an age of iTunes, the value of songs has never been more important. A great song announces to the world that you're here, it provides instant interest, etc. "GOYB" in hindsight isn't that song, and it is probably a little too crassly commercial, but it was probably the best song to cross-over with.

At the same time, on this album U2 clearly wanted to break with some established traditions. They built an album that was essentially designed to work as an album; you need all the songs to work. (Hence why Corbijn was so freaked out when the band reworked everything; it threw "Linear" off.) It was Iovine who told them they needed some more singles, hence "Crazy Tonight", which was the late addition and a pretty obvious cash grab. There's always a tension between art and commerce, and U2's never been to sit on one side of the fence...nor should they.

The reality is that no one knows what a hit single is, even the artists. U2 has never known. Sometimes they've hit, sometimes they've missed. They like those songs that can do their work for them; but at the same time, they're certainly not just a singles band. (Clearly, since the second single from JT was going to be "Red Hill Mining Town.")

 

[The Sad Punk]

This sums up U2's old ethic at 2:38: "We might lose some of the pop kids, but we don't need them."
YouTube - U2 - Zoo TV - Opening Night (1992)

I am so fucking sick of you quoting that.

Actually, I could shorten that down a couple words.

 

[jonnytakeawalk]

This is depressing to read, knowing that there's a less overcooked version of Stand Up Comedy somewhere (I can't see how it could be worse than what we got), and that Bono's still on this 45 bullshit. We get it, you did this with the last two albums, give it a fucking rest. The Joshua Tree and Achtung Baby didn't focus on hit songs--guess what, each album had a handful of successful singles! Focus on the fucking MUSIC, not on the audience.

Yes. These 'hit' singles have ruined NLOTH for me. Taken it from what could have been a classic album to just a great album. SUC sucks, Crazy tonight sucks, Boots sucks. How these songs got on the album over winter is beyond me

 

[Salome]

This sums up U2's old ethic at 2:38: "We might lose some of the pop kids, but we don't need them."

has it again been a week already since you posted this last time?
btw, if you think Bono was 100% sincere when he said this then it says more about how gullible you are than it says anything about the change in U2's work ethics

and anyone who reckons the main riffs of Even better ... and Mysterious Ways weren't written with an audience in mind also is in need of a reality check
doesn't make these songs any less good though

 

[Muldfeld]

It's also important to note -- and I've always thought about U2 in this way -- that, unlike The Cure, whose gems were couched between hit singles that were sometimes amazing and sometimes not so great, U2 could always be counted on to have their singles represent the best of their albums. Look at the singles for most of the band's albums into 1997. The Joshua Tree's Streets, I Still Haven't Found, With or Without You are arguably the absolute best of that album; same for Achtung Baby's One and The Fly and even Mysterious Ways. Even Pop had Please.

The last 2 albums seemed even to stick to this, although I hated Vertigo, All Because of You, and eventually Elevation, Walk On, etc.
This new album's singles seem a serious departure. The band is unwilling to put out its best work or, it seems, its singles are considerably lower in quality.

has it again been a week already since you posted this last time?
btw, if you think Bono was 100% sincere when he said this then it says more about how gullible you are than it says anything about the change in U2's work ethics

and anyone who reckons the main riffs of Even better ... and Mysterious Ways weren't written with an audience in mind also is in need of a reality check
doesn't make these songs any less good though

I keep quoting it because lots of people keep saying that U2 always wanted to be big. This quotation/video shows that the band didn't aim for this at any cost. Again, it's about degrees. This is a pop band that loves pop music, but you can't tell me the riffs on those Achtung Baby singles aren't far more satisfying and dynamic than fracking Vertigo and All Because of You and Walk On and Elevation -- that they're not being ripped off for these later singles with far more obvious subject matter.

 

[Muldfeld]

I just feel this should be emphasized when reading Muldfeld's opinions.

You know, you've been targeting me snarkily since The 4400 thread and I think it's highly unprofessional that you maintain your mod status. You consistently object to things I say but never converse with me with any respect. You even mocked a review I wrote but never actually bothered to read it. I'm really sick of your general disposition. There's a way to disagree without being disagreeable; rhiannsu is a perfect example of a fair debater. It's not as obvious with you as it is others like U2Bonovoxsuperstar or dalton, but more subtle with you, but you know what I mean.

Case in point:

You seem particularly bent on the idea that U2 are somehow not being themselves, and that really they are some purely artistically-minded group that has been led astray. U2 have always, always wanted to be a big band, always wanted to have hits on the radio, and always wanted to be relevant. How you've formed it in your mind that they haven't or that there was a point in time when they were only in it for the "art" (dark, brooding art, I should say, as apparently joyous art isn't art in your eyes) is beyond me.

Why are you isolating/quoting me, when I was referring to the poster before me who said it best.

Anyway, I never said any such thing. I love music that conveys joy like some of The Cure's stuff. Pride is another great U2 song, but their "up" movement this last decade has sucked, and is manifested in Bono's phony action stances.

 

[djerdap]

I wish I never heard that "For Your Love" HQ clip - it had so much potential. Instead, there is Stand Up Comedy, which is easily the worst song on the album, along with Boots.

This article actually reminds me of a fake that Zoomerang posted couple of months back.

 

[roy]

Thanks so much NamckuR. It only makes me more upset with the band. Achtung Baby had no sell-out moments -- maybe some of the lyrics, but nothing else.

Nonsense. U2 have always cared about hits, especially so on AB as they were worried about sales. I think the quote below from Q magazine adaquately explains their state of mind at that time.

"Producer Steve Lillywhite remembers the mixing of "Who's Gonna Ride Your Wild Horses" (notably absent from the forthcoming Best of) as being especially testing.

"They hated that song," he says. "I spent a month on it and I still don't think it was as realised as it could've been. The Americans had heard it and said, That's your radio song there, because they were having trouble with some of the more industrial elements. It's almost like a covers band doing a U2 moment. Maybe we tried too hard."


No sell-outs indeed.

 

[ozeeko]

Nonsense. U2 have always cared about hits, especially so on AB as they were worried about sales. I think the quote below from Q magazine adaquately explains their state of mind at that time.

"Producer Steve Lillywhite remembers the mixing of "Who's Gonna Ride Your Wild Horses" (notably absent from the forthcoming Best of) as being especially testing.

"They hated that song," he says. "I spent a month on it and I still don't think it was as realised as it could've been. The Americans had heard it and said, That's your radio song there, because they were having trouble with some of the more industrial elements. It's almost like a covers band doing a U2 moment. Maybe we tried too hard."


No sell-outs indeed.

HA!

I said just the other day that WGRYWH is the most shallow song of AB!

That said, I still find it awesome, but mostly because of the middle 8 (the part they cut out for radio for us dumb Americans who can't grasp music with more than 2 chord changes)

 

[U2girl]

Nostalgia and bias ftw.

nicely said Dana !

It's good that Winter didn't make the cut.

 

[ozeeko]

It's good that Winter didn't make the cut.

I'll second that! If only the same could be said about SUC.

I'm listening to the album right now, all the way through. My newest assessment is this:

CT holds up the strongest out of the 3 middle pop songs. It's probably the best song out of the 3.

GOYB - i barely realized it was there. It didn't hold my attention at all.

SUC - By the time this song hits, I forget what album I'm even listening to. It's like Bono from the South Park episode hijacked my album.

When Fez finally starts, I'm like "oh yea! I'm listening to NLOTH!"

 

[U2girl]

The mid-trinity of the album strikes again.

CT works as a pop song, is out of place on the album. Boots fits within the album. SUC I'm less sure about.

 

[ozeeko]

The mid-trinity of the album strikes again.

CT works as a pop song, is out of place on the album. Boots fits within the album. SUC I'm less sure about.

I totally agree about CT and Boots - I think CT is more enjoyable to listen to, while Boots is maybe the better song but sometimes the sound of it is just grating (i think i gotta be in the mood for it). But yea, Boots does belong on this album more, fits in with the other moods, themes, whathaveyou. SUC on the other hand i would've thrown off the album. I would've slapped a restraining order on its ass.

 

[cjboog]

I agree with Bono. What is the point of Rock n' Roll if no one's listening? Yah sure all these new indie artists that Pitchfork worships are great but they sell 100,000 albums and have absolutely zero cultural impact.

Achtung Baby had some incredibly catchy songs on it.

 

[ozeeko]

I agree with Bono. What is the point of Rock n' Roll if no one's listening? Yah sure all these new indie artists that Pitchfork worships are great but they sell 100,000 albums and have absolutely zero cultural impact.

Achtung Baby had some incredibly catchy songs on it.

I don't think Bono should be the final word on what's good or bad based on popularity.

I think critics usually rave more over indie bands because they need the critical recognition. It creates a buzz. U2 were once an indie band, don't forget. Bono shouldn't forget his roots.

How many albums did the Velvet Underground sell? How about the Pixies? How much of a cultural impact did they have?

 

[IrishDawg]

So Stand Up used to be the led zeppelin sounding riff from the Fez videos a year back? Meh, they shoulda kept it that way.

 

[santiago]

Well, I think there always was a tension between singles and album tracks with U2, right from the start, including UF (Pride), JT (first three songs) and AB (EBTTRT and WGRYWH). The WTSHNN episode is well documented, with U2 spending a lot of time on perfecting “the single”, whereas Eno thought there were more interesting things to do. You can also se the UF sessions with the band focusing enormously on Pride, which was “the single” as well. I bet this has happened on most U2 albums (hell, even in Passengers, Edge and Bono decided to work a bit more on a few songs to take them further and make them more presentable. This was “Miss Sarajevo” and “Your blue room”.)

While I generally sympathise with Eno's point of view (and really prefer the innovative side of the band), it's great that U2 also want to appeal to as many people as possible and keep operating at a huge level while making great music. When they get it right, they turn a lot of people on to what is really creative and wonderful music. Also, in those cases they can achieve hits with fairly innovative material (WOWY, MW, etc..).

I think that's alright in principle. In NLOTH, this tension is exacerbated by putting some really innovative tracks next to really commercial tracks. IGCIIDGCT and SUC both seem to come from a different world and break the flow of the album. They are like experiments in writing pop-rock pop songs (something they haven't done much of, really). I think if they had been as commercial but with a more interesting sound that would have been closer to the album, (there maybe some early versions around that fulfill that) they might have worked.

As the album overall is the best thing U2 have released in ages, I am loathe to get very upset about that. I almost consider those two songs as "interesting outtakes from the NLOTH sessions", the way that one would listen to "Are you gonna wait forever?" from the ATYCLB sessions and think "hmmmh, this is not great, but it's actually quite interesting".

So I hope in the future they band keep trying to bring their experimental and single tendencies closer together. I hope they continue their life-long argument with Eno and Lanois and that the results continue to be exciting and challenging music.

 

[roy]

So Stand Up used to be the led zeppelin sounding riff from the Fez videos a year back? Meh, they shoulda kept it that way.

For Your Love was boring as hell. I'm glad they never used this along with Winter.