I just came from a 'Meet & Greet' with Daniel Lanois

[Yahweh]

Lets also be clear to be memorable in music these days is not easy due to the fact that everybody that has the Internet has access to any album they want at any time they want so in order to make a masterpiece that hasnt been heard before and is mindblowing to the fanbase is at least 10 times as difficult as it was even 20 years ago.

To make a masterpiece that everybody even those outside the fanbase will appriciate is even more tough then that, even for U2 it will be very difficult to make something that is considered a masterpiece just due to circumstance.

Which albums during the last decade since the year 2000 have been considered to be a masterpiece by the general public as a whole? None that I can think of.

So if U2 can pull it off it will be nothing short of a miracle.

 

[Irishteen]

At times I wish U2 would stop trying to make a masterpiece; they've made 2 5 star albums (TUF and AB); and I can't even think of any band who has ever made 3.

I'm not even that excited for this album; I mean is it really gonna be a masterpiece? Probably not. Will it be a brilliant album? Probably but there's been at least 3 brilliant albums released this year so meh U2 are hardly the only band capable of making good music.

 

[martha]

Lets also be clear to be memorable in music these days is not easy due to the fact that everybody that has the Internet has access to any album they want at any time they want so in order to make a masterpiece that hasnt been heard before and is mindblowing to the fanbase is at least 10 times as difficult as it was even 20 years ago.

The advent of the internet has nothing to do with making good music. If it's good, it'll be good no matter what.

 

[Irvine511]

i think U2 know a lot more about themselves, their music, and their career than i do.

i take them at their word -- not literally, but in the sense that they know the album isn't ready to be released and they will release it when it's ready, and they will release an album that best reflects where they are and what they want to accomplish. sure, i think the "gosh, we just can't stop writing great songs" is kind of B.S., but i don't know what it's meant to cover up, and just because it might be obscuring some fact doesn't mean that the overall opinion coming from all corners of U2 world regarding this album has changed. by all accounts, all, the buzz has been enormously positive. enormously.

so let's wait and see.

i think ATYCLB is pretty much exactly what they wanted, HTDAAB is a bit strained but has a thrill-ride quality that none of their other albums have. to me, Pop is awash in ideas and inspiration but the execution is pretty poor.

it's tough to get all the stars to align.

 

[bathiu]

i take them at their word -- not literally, but in the sense that they know the album isn't ready to be released and they will release it when it's ready,

Q: When the album is ready and finished?
A: When it's in the shops.

~Adam Clayton. HTDAAB DVD.

 

[LemonMelon]

At times I wish U2 would stop trying to make a masterpiece; they've made 2 5 star albums (TUF and AB); and I can't even think of any band who has ever made 3.

As far as bands who have released three masterpieces (by general consensus, anyway) I could name several:

The Beatles (Revolver, Sgt. Pepper, Abbey Road, etc.)
The Rolling Stones (Beggars Banquet, Let It Bleed, Sticky Fingers, etc.)
The Who (The Who Sell Out, Who's Next, Quadrophenia)
Led Zeppelin (II, IV, Houses Of The Holy, etc.)
The Velvet Underground (VU & Nico, White Light/White Heat, self-titled, etc.)
U2 (UF, Joshua Tree, Achtung Baby, etc.)
Radiohead (The Bends, OK Computer, Kid A, etc.)
David Bowie (Hunky Dory, Ziggy Stardust, Low, etc.)
Miles Davis (Kind Of Blue, In A Silent Way, Bitches Brew, etc.)
Neil Young (Everybody Knows This Is Nowhere, After The Gold Rush, On The Beach, etc.)
Prince (1999, Purple Rain, Sign O The Times, etc.)

 

[SamuelSmeloc]

^^
Don't forget Pink Floyd (Dark Side Of The Moon, The Wall, Wish You Were Here...).

 

[LemonMelon]

^^
Don't forget Pink Floyd (Dark Side Of The Moon, The Wall, Wish You Were Here...).

Damn. And I'm a huge fan too. Personally, I rate Animals and Meddle above The Wall, but that's a good one as well.

Anyway, the point is made. Plenty of artists have matched U2's achievement of releasing at least 3 fantastic albums.

 

[GirlsAloudFan]

Dylan: Highway 61, Blonde on Blonde, Blood on the Tracks, etc.

 

[Irishteen]

As far as bands who have released three masterpieces (by general consensus, anyway) I could name several:

The Beatles (Revolver, Sgt. Pepper, Abbey Road, etc.)
The Rolling Stones (Beggars Banquet, Let It Bleed, Sticky Fingers, etc.)
The Who (The Who Sell Out, Who's Next, Quadrophenia)
Led Zeppelin (II, IV, Houses Of The Holy, etc.)
The Velvet Underground (VU & Nico, White Light/White Heat, self-titled, etc.)
U2 (UF, Joshua Tree, Achtung Baby, etc.)
Radiohead (The Bends, OK Computer, Kid A, etc.)
David Bowie (Hunky Dory, Ziggy Stardust, Low, etc.)
Miles Davis (Kind Of Blue, In A Silent Way, Bitches Brew, etc.)
Neil Young (Everybody Knows This Is Nowhere, After The Gold Rush, On The Beach, etc.)
Prince (1999, Purple Rain, Sign O The Times, etc.)

Maybe for the general consensus but not to me...but I don't want to argue except to say Revolver is insanely overrated

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

The other thing is from all reports only Bono and The Edge were in New York...there were no sightings of Adam or Larry...I know how large a role Bono and Edge play in U2 but wouldn't you need all of U2 to "completely rewrite" songs that were finished???

if you weren't aware, new york's a fairly large place. it's entirely possible that adam and larry were in new york and no one saw them. if lanois said they were in new york, i'm pretty much gonna guess that they were somewhere in new york.

 

[LastNameonEarth]

I've avoided coming on here for the past few weeks, and it's interesting from reading this thread and others that the closer we get to the new year, the more people seem to be guessing further into 2009 for the release date...with no substance to the speculation. Surely Spiderman creates a deadline for putting this album out?

The re-writing of some of the songs may be a huge positive, after all we can all cite occasions where it's worked incredibly well. I think U2 burnt their fingers after cooking up HTDAAB - they thought they were releasing a great record, but afterwards felt it fell a little short. They appear to be taking extra care this time in a bid to make sure they achieve their goal. Fair enough.

It's ridiculous to question (as someone did) whether U2 care anymore - if that were the case, why would they not just settle for what they had? Why don't they just release all the 50-60 songs they have and watch as the money rolls in? U2 have always been an ambitious band, leave them to be ambitious and we'll have to wait and see what happens.

Re: the 5-star album debate, U2 have TJT and AB which had that mass appeal U2 strive for - many of my music-loving friends who aren't into U2 wouldn't have even heard of TUF, but they all know TJT and AB. ATYCLB was close. The general consensus definitely didn't consider Kid A a masterpiece!

 

[LemonMelon]

The general consensus definitely didn't consider Kid A a masterpiece!

Now that's just plain wrong. It's always, always listed right along with The Bends and OK Computer among Radiohead's finest work. Actually, I can think of many folks who would consider it their very best album. The album sold well, the critics adored it...if Kid A doesn't qualify as a modern masterpiece, I have no idea what would.

 

[purpleoscar]

Now that's just plain wrong. It's always, always listed right along with The Bends and OK Computer among Radiohead's finest work. Actually, I can think of many folks who would consider it their very best album. The album sold well, the critics adored it...if Kid A doesn't qualify as a modern masterpiece, I have no idea what would.

I hope In Rainbows will be included in the future

 

[LemonMelon]

I hope In Rainbows will be included in the future

Me too. I like it just as much, but it needs at least 5 years or so to sink in to the public consciousness before it can realistically be considered a "masterpiece".

 

[Irishteen]

Now that's just plain wrong. It's always, always listed right along with The Bends and OK Computer among Radiohead's finest work. Actually, I can think of many folks who would consider it their very best album. The album sold well, the critics adored it...if Kid A doesn't qualify as a modern masterpiece, I have no idea what would.

Kid A is definitely a masterpiece ; I don't think Bends deserves to be called a masterpiece though; In Rainbows comes close to being one at least in my mind

 

[ChargedVT]

Personally, my thoughts are if the March 09 release date is to be met, the band need to be out of the studio by Mid-December. So we have about 8 weeks longer in which the band can tinker around.

 

[Screwtape2]

Maybe a masterpeice in the music media but you can't claim an album is considered a masterpeice by the general public. There would be nothing to back it up with.

I think a masterpeice is something that just happens. You can't set out to make one because you'll never be pleased enough with it. U2 just needs to make the music and albums that have to make before while they still can. Sales and popularity are far too important to them.

 

[Yahweh]

The Internet has plenty to do with what people consider great in music these days. The vast majority of people have such a short attention span that they can barely listen to one song never mind a full album.

People under 30 generally decide what a classic is and the majority of these people have grown up with the Internet and want a quick fix something that hits them here and now, albums that take a long time to sink in will long since be forgotten by this generation of music listeners.

This is reality to make an album that people outside of a hardcore fan base will listen to from start to finish is almost impossible these days.

The one thing U2 will be battling with the hardcore fans is a preconcieved notion that they are not able to put out the "masterpiece" anymore and that they are long past their peak song-writing days. This has more to do with the nostalgia of how a certain song or album made you feel at the time. Will U2 be able to ever equal that for the majority of the fans....likely not....but with every album they do gain some new fans that have the same feelings we once had when we opened up our first or second U2 record and said...damn this is great.

In the end it has to come down to the band genuinely feeling something for the material and as they said on PopMart "if they like it it can't be bullshit for you", and if it is I would suggest moving on to something else that made you feel the way U2 did one day in the past.

Either that or you could Fuck the past....and kiss the future....

I hope that everybody on here will give the album a good listen or 2 or 3 or 10 before forming a personal opinion, rather then before they even open the package, saying U2 going back into the studio was a mistake. How are we to know that?

I hope I am wring but I can already see the negativity that will follow the first few weeks of saying this album is the best thing since sliced bread....in reality it will probably be neither one of those extremes, but having said that if it is the best album ever for even 1 out of every 10 U2 fans I would consider it an achievement, based on current backlash towards the newer material.

 

[last unicorn]

Fact is we don't know the real reason and we don't know what's really going on in the band, so I think it's unfair and unnecessary to speculate about it and act as if we were part of the band or its inner circle and know anything. I just hope there aren't any serious personal issues ("family"), everything else could be dealt with. U2 as artists should have the last say when it comes to their work and it's on them to decide whether it's a good record and when it should be released. Fans can rant as much as they want, but they are not there to fulfill our wishes.

 

[luna_lovegood]

The Internet has plenty to do with what people consider great in music these days. The vast majority of people have such a short attention span that they can barely listen to one song never mind a full album.

People under 30 generally decide what a classic is and the majority of these people have grown up with the Internet and want a quick fix something that hits them here and now, albums that take a long time to sink in will long since be forgotten by this generation of music listeners.

This is reality to make an album that people outside of a hardcore fan base will listen to from start to finish is almost impossible these days.

The one thing U2 will be battling with the hardcore fans is a preconcieved notion that they are not able to put out the "masterpiece" anymore and that they are long past their peak song-writing days. This has more to do with the nostalgia of how a certain song or album made you feel at the time. Will U2 be able to ever equal that for the majority of the fans....likely not....but with every album they do gain some new fans that have the same feelings we once had when we opened up our first or second U2 record and said...damn this is great.

In the end it has to come down to the band genuinely feeling something for the material and as they said on PopMart "if they like it it can't be bullshit for you", and if it is I would suggest moving on to something else that made you feel the way U2 did one day in the past.

Either that or you could Fuck the past....and kiss the future....

I hope that everybody on here will give the album a good listen or 2 or 3 or 10 before forming a personal opinion, rather then before they even open the package, saying U2 going back into the studio was a mistake. How are we to know that?

I hope I am wring but I can already see the negativity that will follow the first few weeks of saying this album is the best thing since sliced bread....in reality it will probably be neither one of those extremes, but having said that if it is the best album ever for even 1 out of every 10 U2 fans I would consider it an achievement, based on current backlash towards the newer material.

Good post. I agree. Its tragic but true. The art of an album is lost on the wider public. Well, mainly on Gen Y - we have trashed the music industry.

 

[LastNameonEarth]

Maybe a masterpeice in the music media but you can't claim an album is considered a masterpeice by the general public. There would be nothing to back it up with.

I agree. I think the "masterpiece" Lanois says U2 are trying to make, is one that seaps into the popular conscious, more so than being critically adored (although this is obviously important). An album with songs that demand endless radio play, but also have longevity. Hopefully U2 still have another one of thse records in them.

Kid A was considered a masterpiece by many critics and fans (like me), but it massively divided opinion, even amongst Radiohead fans. Thus, I can't see how anyone can say it was loved by the "general consensus". It's sales weren't spectacular either. The Bends and OK Computer were giant mountains on the landscape of their time, everyone knew of them even if they didn't climb them. Kid A was a small hill with a sensational view, that was loved by the few.

 

[last unicorn]

If I like an album I don't care whether it's loved by a gazillion people or only a few hundred. My personal opinion isn't depending on other people's views.

 

[bathiu]

If I like an album I don't care whether it's loved by a gazillion people or only a few hundred. My personal opinion isn't depending on other people's views.

Great line I'll have to remember it to defend POP's "failure" in future threads.

 

[bathiu]

Re: the 5-star album debate, U2 have TJT and AB which had that mass appeal U2 strive for - many of my music-loving friends who aren't into U2 wouldn't have even heard of TUF, but they all know TJT and AB. ATYCLB was close. The general consensus definitely didn't consider Kid A a masterpiece!

I agree about TUF, for most people it's "this album with Pride".
War on the other hand is considered a masterpiece by many - U2's breakthrough album, a worldwide debut, something different, honest, important back then, now a classic for many.
War-JT-AB the 3 masterpieces (add ATYCLB as 4th if you want)

...and I agree about Kida A

 

[martha]

The Internet has plenty to do with what people consider great in music these days. The vast majority of people have such a short attention span that they can barely listen to one song never mind a full album.

Well, mainly on Gen Y - we have trashed the music industry.

You both said this so well.

People under 30 generally decide what a classic is

No, each individual does. I still don't understand how something as boring and mainstream as ATYCLB has been designated a "classic."

I hope that everybody on here will give the album a good listen or 2 or 3 or 10 before forming a personal opinion, rather then before they even open the package, saying U2 going back into the studio was a mistake.

I will, I will. I always do. It took me years to wrap my head around UF. I couldn't stand it when it first came out because it was so different from the first three. Now I love it.

 

[bathiu]

I still don't understand how something as boring and mainstream as ATYCLB has been designated a "classic."

look at that, ME "defending" ATYCLB.....

combination of: 1) released at the right moment, 2) specific events around the world, 3) very weak competition from other bands

 

[last unicorn]

For me, personally, ATYCLB is a classic, because of all their album, it lifts me up the most. I guess it's the U2 album I listen to most and I usually listen to it from start to finish. It was just the right album to be released at the right moment.

I guess everyone is different in terms of defining their ultimate masterpieces, I just don't want to accept the categories made up by some people as the one and only truth.

 

[martha]

look at that, ME "defending" ATYCLB.....

combination of: 1) released at the right moment, 2) specific events around the world, 3) very weak competition from other bands

Notice that "great music" isn't in your list.

And that's the problem.

 

[bathiu]

Notice that "great music" isn't in your list.

And that's the problem.

oh, I agree with you 100%, check my post history about that album if you want.
I'm just saying that it was an important album, both for U2 and the music world,
yes, probably more of a "classic" by accident than because of the music, but still - unfortunately - a "classic"