Maybe the naysayers of NLOTH have some truth...

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
walkon274 said:
I disagree though about your analysis of what is good. There are many ways you can measure a "good" song. Of course each listener has their own subjective opinion. However, while mass sales do not always equate with "good" they can some times be an indicator. U2 has sold over 140 millions albums because they are a f$cking great rock band. Likewise, I think the fact the first single, which usually is the strongest radio song on the album, dropped like a stone says something about the overall quality of the song and the album. My initial reaction was, wow how could anyone like this? Obviously not too many people do.

The next thought becomes, well what other songs really stand out above and beyond GOYB? Magnificent and Breathe, that's it. I guarantee you no other song on that album will go anywhere on radio or be praised.

Come to think of it, Magnficent, and to a lesser degree Breathe, may be the only way this album keeps selling come summer time.
Click to expand...

We do disagree on how to prove a song's artistic merit (or lack thereof). That's perfectly alright. I personally think that listening to the top 10 albums of each year, searching for said merit, is a waste of time, as such lists are pretty much a wasteland. There are exceptions, and a handful of truly stimulating albums (I'm not talking about Katy Perry here, although the definition of "stimulating" is fairly broad :wink: ), will be accepted by the mainstream. But just a handful. NLOTH will be one of those albums, and I'm saying that as someone who has had a lot of experience with this band's music. Plus, it's hardly a leap of faith; a new U2 album going platinum is as inevitable as the sunrise.

If this album sells a couple million fewer than ATYCLB and HTDAAB, will that show U2's relevance waning? I don't see that as an unreasonable line of thinking. But do I really give a fuck? No. U2 is relevant to me. To my life. And that SHOULD be all that matters to me in regards to which records I listen to on a daily basis. I'm not going to adopt the tastes of a Lil Wayne fan because their favorite artist is relevant to the mainstream record-buying public. Fuck that. Furthermore, the idea that a lack of sales (relative to the artist themselves) somehow proves that U2 is unable to release quality music is absolutely laughable on all counts. Most records that critics consider masterpieces have sold far less than NLOTH will inevitably sell.

In short, none of this really matters. You will either enjoy the album or you won't, and U2 will either carry on or they won't. They claimed NLOTH to be a fine work, and if it falls through the cracks, perhaps they will finally realize that the majority of the record-buying public is uninformed and tasteless. Who knows? It would probably be to everyone's benefit.
 
walkon274 said:
and people again say I'm a troll. Why? I am entitled to my opinion.
Click to expand...

it's because of your general attitude. saying things like "I listen to songs probably alot more deeper than you or most people you know" is not going to earn you any respect around here.
 
walkon274 said:
I love U2 but this may be when their ship starts to sale. Why can't this be discussed?
Click to expand...

You're projecting your dislike of the album onto the general public and you're looking for any way possibly to make it seem like they agree with you, which mostly has resulted in you grasping for straws.

That's why.
 
mikal said:
it's because of your general attitude. saying things like "I listen to songs probably alot more deeper than you or most people you know" is not going to earn you any respect around here.
Click to expand...

Maybe walkon274 is someone LastEdgeOnEarth knows.
 
Let's see: people :drool::drool::drool::drool::drool: for anything Radiohead these days. I reckon they have been making interesting sounds but I'm not sure that moves me. And I do like music being innovative, in certain aspects. I respect Radiohead, but their songs do not touch my soul. And U2 songs touch my soul deeply. I think that's the part I'm interested in music. If the songs are flawless in an aspect but fail in the emotional factor they are not quite worth. And Boots move me for lots of aspects. And interestingly, I - that I'm not quite a dancer - feel like dancing when the song starts to play. It's a very good pop factor because I think the song has this quality and it has substance as well.
 
VintagePunk said:
It seems that some people are too busy analyzing and critiquing to actually feel the music, and enjoy it. I feel sorry for them, in a way.
Click to expand...

Would you stop making sensible posts that I agree with - I keep thinking I've wandered into the wrong forum! :D
 
mikal said:
it's because of your general attitude. saying things like "I listen to songs probably alot more deeper than you or most people you know" is not going to earn you any respect around here.
Click to expand...

Hey man, that was a response to a poster who stated he had a background in music theory and that I was someone who didn't listen to music "deeply", read the ENTIRE thread.
 
walkon274 said:
However, if we're going to seriously discuss how good the album is, let's actually consider reality here. The lead single's top position was what? 64th? That's not good reception for what some were calling the most anticipated album of the year.
Click to expand...

If you're going to talk chart positions, at least use the correct info. Get On Your Boots debuted at #37 on the Hot 100, which was U2's highest debut since Discothèque. Yes, the song dropped down in the weeks after that one, but that doesn't take away from the fact that it reached #37.
Vertigo peaked at the low thirties (#31 or so), so Get On Your Boots is quite comparable. It makes it about as good a hit as that one, or as Pride, Even Better Than The Real Thing or Who's Gonna Ride Your Wild Horses. And songs like Last Night on Earth, Sometimes..., Stuck..., All I Want Is You, When Love Comes To Town, The Fly or Stay didn't even make it to the Top 40.
 
walkon274 said:
I told people 4 weeks ago that in my opinion GOYB blew and that in my opinion it had no substance. Every one blasted me on here for not "proving" why it sucked. Yet, low and behold apparently millions of unbiased, U2 minds think it sucks too.
Click to expand...

I think that GOYB "lacks substance" in the same way that Discotheque and Mofo might "lack substance." On the surface, they're all shiny, uptempo, rocking tunes that might seem very superficial on the surface, but once you delve into them, listen to the layers of sound, look over the lyrics and think about what they're trying to say, they're anything but "lacking substance."

Unfortunately, the kind of attention one has to pay to the music in order to "get it" is something that a lot of the ADD-stricken general public doesn't seem able to give. That's why I wouldn't be at all surprised if this album has more Pop-like sales numbers than HTDAAB numbers. It's not instantly accessible the way HTDAAB and ATYCLB were, it requires attention, and stripping away of the layers to appreciate.

But does that make the band less relevant, or mean that the music is not great? Not at all.
 
The song also dropped mostly because U2 released the song:

1. A month before they told people they were going to, so there was no buildup that would have gotten people interested in the track.

2. Without a video.

3. Without a CD.

So, there's that. They kind of fucked the song over.
 
LemonMelon said:
We do disagree on how to prove a song's artistic merit (or lack thereof). That's perfectly alright. I personally think that listening to the top 10 albums of each year, searching for said merit, is a waste of time, as such lists are pretty much a wasteland. There are exceptions, and a handful of truly stimulating albums (I'm not talking about Katy Perry here, although the definition of "stimulating" is fairly broad :wink: ), will be accepted by the mainstream. But just a handful. NLOTH will be one of those albums, and I'm saying that as someone who has had a lot of experience with this band's music. Plus, it's hardly a leap of faith; a new U2 album going platinum is as inevitable as the sunrise.

If this album sells a couple million fewer than ATYCLB and HTDAAB, will that show U2's relevance waning? I don't see that as an unreasonable line of thinking. But do I really give a fuck? No. U2 is relevant to me. To my life. And that SHOULD be all that matters to me in regards to which records I listen to on a daily basis. I'm not going to adopt the tastes of a Lil Wayne fan because their favorite artist is relevant to the mainstream record-buying public. Fuck that. Furthermore, the idea that a lack of sales (relative to the artist themselves) somehow proves that U2 is unable to release quality music is absolutely laughable on all counts. Most records that critics consider masterpieces have sold far less than NLOTH will inevitably sell.

In short, none of this really matters. You will either enjoy the album or you won't, and U2 will either carry on or they won't. They claimed NLOTH to be a fine work, and if it falls through the cracks, perhaps they will finally realize that the majority of the record-buying public is uninformed and tasteless. Who knows? It would probably be to everyone's benefit.
Click to expand...

Very good post. Your arguments are very valid and I see your point. Ultimately though, I only really "feel", "enjoy", "desire to listen to", "relevance" etc. to three or four songs on this album. I'm disappointed. When some of us come on here and say we are disappointed and why, we get blasted for it. Yet, this article was just one of the several things that have popped up recently that tell me I'm not entirely crazy for not liking GOYB or this album, b/c evidently a lot of other people don't either.

I was interested in whether people thought that maybe this album has a chance of tanking on a RELEVANCE side like Pop. That's all. When I say "relevant" I mean it in the way Bono and the band always talk about.
 
walkon274 said:
Very good post. Your arguments are very valid and I see your point. Ultimately though, I only really "feel", "enjoy", "desire to listen to", "relevance" etc. to three or four songs on this album. I'm disappointed. When some of us come on here and say we are disappointed and why, we get blasted for it. Yet, this article was just one of the several things that have popped up recently that tell me I'm not entirely crazy for not liking GOYB or this album, b/c evidently a lot of other people don't either.

I was interested in whether people thought that maybe this album has a chance of tanking on a RELEVANCE side like Pop. That's all. When I say "relevant" I mean it in the way Bono and the band always talk about.
Click to expand...

You can dislike the album all you want. But just because other people dislike it in the public doesn't make you "right," which for some odd reason seems to be what you're trying to prove here. You haven't said it implicitly, but there doesn't seem to be any other motive here for you than getting people to say, "Hmmm, maybe the album does suck and you had it all along!"
 
walkon274 said:
Hold on bro. First off, why do I need concrete evidence to state my opinion on here? That seems to be the general trend with a few interesting individuals in this forum. They demand concrete evidence as if every poster is on trial for giving an opinion.
Click to expand...

because when you make a claim like "the band is blatantly ripping themselves off" then it helps to show proof of what you are talking about...in case you don't get the difference between expressing an opinion and making a claim like you did in that quote.....bro.

walkon274 said:
I've also said I think this album save for about 3 - 4 songs is rubbish, and people again say I'm a troll. Why? I am entitled to my opinion. I'm not trying to convince anyone on here. The point though is, many of you simply don't want to be open-minded or critical about this new album.
Click to expand...

I love how the most close minded people with the most one sided arguments are the first ones to waive the "open-minded flag". To quote Bono in the song Breathe: PLEASE!



walkon274 said:
As to everyone else, remember Bono said before this album RELEVANCE mattered. In this case, that means RELEVANCE to the music scene in general. GOYB certainly is not relevant. I'm worried about NLOTH being relevant too.
Click to expand...

You keep incessantly referring to GOYB to back your claim and further your point that the album is not relevant yet you continuously ignore the fact that there are 10 other songs that sound nothing like GOYB. Its time to change your argument my friend, its getting old and tired.
 
LemonMelon said:
They claimed NLOTH to be a fine work, and if it falls through the cracks, perhaps they will finally realize that the majority of the record-buying public is uninformed and tasteless. Who knows? It would probably be to everyone's benefit.
Click to expand...

I share that sentiment.

But U2 wouldn't be U2 if they did. Despite the 90s bravado, U2 have always believed in the people. Maybe more than that they've believed in themselves, believed that if they could just hit the right note or cook up the right sound they could shatter the mainstream consciousness. They've been making "supersonic gospel" their whole career, managing to slip rock-soul into a mainstream that has tended over the past 20 years more and more away from anything with those gospel roots.

And you know what? They've been proven right. They've shown that a "Beautiful Day" can slip in and take over the mainstream from "H to the Izzo" and Britney Spears, that the people will still choose a "One" over throwaway 90s pop.

GOYB didn't do that for them; of course, GOYB was always a set-up just like The Fly was, a song to herald their return before wheeling in the big guns. Well, the herald's been lost somewhere, and now it's up to "Magnificent," "Breathe," or even "Crazy Tonight" to take back the soul of commercial music.

As much as the typical U2 fanatic would disparage the opinions of the mainstream, U2 still believe that the mainstream will choose the better music, the music with a soul, if they can just kick down the door.

And as much as I love NLOTH, I know that if it doesn't kick down that door, they'll be back to the drawing board to figure out what will.
 
VintagePunk said:
I think that GOYB "lacks substance" in the same way that Discotheque and Mofo might "lack substance." On the surface, they're all shiny, uptempo, rocking tunes that might seem very superficial on the surface, but once you delve into them, listen to the layers of sound, look over the lyrics and think about what they're trying to say, they're anything but "lacking substance."

Unfortunately, the kind of attention one has to pay to the music in order to "get it" is something that a lot of the ADD-stricken general public doesn't seem able to give. That's why I wouldn't be at all surprised if this album has more Pop-like sales numbers than HTDAAB numbers. It's not instantly accessible the way HTDAAB and ATYCLB were, it requires attention, and stripping away of the layers to appreciate.

But does that make the band less relevant, or mean that the music is not great? Not at all.
Click to expand...

I agree with your comments in the first paragraph. However, your second paragraph implies that I have not "listened" to GOYB or NLOTH enough to get it. I've listened to GOYB about 100 times and don't hear all these interesting layers, depth, or meanings everyone talks about. The song still sounds like a sucky version of a lifted "Wild Wild West" to me. Most of the rest of the album sounds the same way...repeated sounds U2 has already used in other songs or melodies from other people. It's just very uncreative or unoriginal in my personal opinion. We can agree to disagree though.
 
walkon274 said:
I agree with your comments in the first paragraph. However, your second paragraph implies that I have not "listened" to GOYB or NLOTH enough to get it. I've listened to GOYB about 100 times and don't hear all these interesting layers, depth, or meanings everyone talks about. The song still sounds like a sucky version of a lifted "Wild Wild West" to me. Most of the rest of the album sounds the same way...repeated sounds U2 has already used in other songs or melodies from other people. It's just very uncreative or unoriginal in my personal opinion. We can agree to disagree though.
Click to expand...

Maybe you've listened carefully and came to the conclusion that it's material you don't enjoy, and that's fine. I was talking more about the tendencies of the general listening public with that statement, the casual fans (or even potential new fans) who might not run right out and buy every new release. I can see them not running out in droves to buy it, the way they did the last two, and that's still okay with me, it doesn't lessen my enjoyment of the album in any way.

I still think there's plenty of time for subsequent singles to attract buyers, though. It was apparent from the beginning that this album is more of a grower than the past two.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

dan_smee
I listened to No Line on the Horizon right through tonight for the first time in about 10 years…
2 3
Replies
83
Views
2K
lazarus
lazarus
T
A quick thought on NLOTH
Replies
26
Views
3K
AndrewCowley
A
the tourist
I Listened To No Line On The Horizon Today
2 3
Replies
82
Views
8K
Rachel D.
Rachel D.
womanfish
All That You Can't Dismantle of An Innocent Horizon
2
Replies
51
Views
3K
Catman
Catman
LuckyNumber7
U2 Catalog: Take the Survey!
3 4 5
Replies
146
Views
10K
LuckyNumber7
LuckyNumber7

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom