New Edge interview 11/20/2008

[JOFO]

I have some really strong feelings about their redone songs from POP. They ended up redoing Discotheque, Staring at the Sun, Gone, and another song I believe for the "Best of". I think POP was brilliant as is.

I absolutely abhor what they did to the sound of the distorted guitar hook during the chorus in Discotheque. Totally pissed me off. Gone is my favorite song from that album and I think they fucked it up when they redid it. Don't get me started on the redo of "Staring at the Sun"....UGH!!!

I think in the end they believe that they were rushed with POP and they didn't get to "polish it up". But thats one of the things I love about that album...the rawness of it. They didn't get to mess with it too much.

Yes, I've said the same since 2002.
There was nothing ever wrong with the mixes on POP; they just freaked out that it wasn't well received and thought a remix would somehow wake people up........WRONG.
It's their lowest moment IMO, and hope they never return to that behavior (remix of Bomb anyone?)

 

[Aygo]

Yes, I've said the same since 2002.
There was nothing ever wrong with the mixes on POP; they just freaked out that it wasn't well received and thought a remix would somehow wake people up........WRONG.
It's their lowest moment IMO, and hope they never return to that behavior (remix of Bomb anyone?)

I think there are troubles with the polishing of the song.
For instance...
I don't know if it's intentional to start "Staring At The Sun" so abruptly and to end it with that "bad-engineered fade out" (you can notice when the sounds finish to move after track 6).
I'm sure that the album version of "Please" was not definitely what the band wanted to take the song, it always feel like a produced-demo.
There are some troubles with "If God Will Send His Angels". It's pretty clear that these were not the final ideas that the band wanted for the song.

 

[cseggleton]

POP is fucking brilliant. I hate that the band ever has to apologize for this album. 90% of that album fantastic and still stands the test of time. Let this album be and never think about trying to re do it!!!

 

[Aygo]

We're not saying that Pop is not great. We're just saying that it's pretty obvious that those ideas were not cooked enough (to the opposite of HTDAAB songs) and that these were definitely not the final vision the band wanted for (at least part of) the songs.

 

[bathiu]

People and the band keep saying Pop is not finished, but for all we know "polishing" it back in 1997 could mean even more electronic stuff in the mix.
In 2002 they already moved to their next "era" and changed the songs in the style of that "era".
That's why I think the new mixes (even the single version of Please) and a possible re-recording of Pop is just not honest. It's just not where the band was back in 1996/1997 and it's not what they wanted to do originaly back then.

 

[Salome]

I think POP is a good album but at the same time it's got so many flaws it baffles me they released it under the name U2

it's a mixed bag in every way
some songs with brilliant new ideas, some songs desperately trying to sound like U2
some brilliant lyrics, some absolute shit ones
some songs with very good production, some songs sounding too dreadfull for words

new mixes was never going to help this album
too many songs just needed more work on serveral levels
the remixes not being improvements doesn't mean that the album versions are therefore good

I do think they have learned an awful lot from the mistakes on that album
and from the bits I read in U2 by U2 and new interviews it seems they have also learned from more recent mistakes

 

[Acrobat51829]

POP is fucking brilliant. I hate that the band ever has to apologize for this album. 90% of that album fantastic and still stands the test of time. Let this album be and never think about trying to re do it!!!

 

[JOFO]

Well, since the release of POP they did redo:

Discotechque (2002 best of)
If God Will Send...(single)
Staring aT the Sun(2002 best of)
Last Night On Earth(single)
Gone(2002 best of)
Please(single)

they only songs they left as is were:

Do You feel Loved
Mofo
Miami
Playboy Mansion
Wake Up Dead Man
If You Wear That Vlevet Dress

 

[the scuv]

For me Pop is both good & bad. It has some of the worst mixing I've ever heard. I think I remember from an old Propaganda mag (up in the loft), that Edge had listened to MOFO over 100 times. Yet the cut/edit right when Bono sing's 'Mother, am I still you son' is just horific!! Last Night isn't finished, and Staring at the Sun has the wrong chord progression which is why it never worked & never will work no matter how many times its remixed. If any of you have an acoustic kicking round, try singing the verse a little faster and with the chords Am G Em F (barred), instead of F then Em. Great potential in most songs, but like they said more time...............

I actually think its good that this new album has been a long time in the making. If you look at how U2's songs grow overtime - the recent version of One on the Vertigo Tour having an additional verse and guitar solo. In addition I believe I read that the band went back and rerecorded things rather than try and 'bolt things on' which I believe has led to the overproduced feel to the recent HTDAAB songs. I believe this next album will have a real cohersive feel with a beginning a middle and an end, rather than a collection of songs.

I don't believe it will be a double album, but I would think that it will be mixed together rather like Paul McCartney's recent album where the whole thing feels like your at a McCartney gig and you can't help but listen to it from start to finish without stopping rather than 'just jab a track on'

 

[PowerSurge]

I think POP is a good album but at the same time it's got so many flaws it baffles me they released it under the name U2

it's a mixed bag in every way
some songs with brilliant new ideas, some songs desperately trying to sound like U2
some brilliant lyrics, some absolute shit ones
some songs with very good production, some songs sounding too dreadfull for words

new mixes was never going to help this album
too many songs just needed more work on serveral levels
the remixes not being improvements doesn't mean that the album versions are therefore good

I do think they have learned an awful lot from the mistakes on that album
and from the bits I read in U2 by U2 and new interviews it seems they have also learned from more recent mistakes

I'm really curious to hear more specifically what examples you would reference for the above comments. I generally view your comments pretty favorably and value your opinion so it would be interesting to hear specifics. I totally agree with everyone that says the album is not completely polished and finished. I mean c'mon, the song Please starts with a baseline by Adam that is off key....among many other problems. That being said, their are many brilliant moments throughout the album. I just think the different sounds that were produced didn't allow the casual U2 fan to relate, and therefore the album suffered in the charts.

With all of the shitty music that is out there on the radio, I doubt the production/mixing of the music is whats keeping a song off the top of the charts. The average fan won't notice the intricasies of a song. So I doubt the real reason why the album suffered was the production, it was the fact that the band pushed the sounds and the music into an unfamiliar territory that the average fans couldn't relate to. It was a brilliant album, but unfortunately was an alien album; from way up in the ether.

 

[pepokiss]

we should start a "I LOVE POP" campaign in U2 shows.. with signs, so the band knows that we want that record to get it's due

 

[JOFO]

For me Pop is both good & bad. It has some of the worst mixing I've ever heard. I think I remember from an old Propaganda mag (up in the loft), that Edge had listened to MOFO over 100 times. Yet the cut/edit right when Bono sing's 'Mother, am I still you son' is just horific!! Last Night isn't finished, and Staring at the Sun has the wrong chord progression which is why it never worked & never will work no matter how many times its remixed. If any of you have an acoustic kicking round, try singing the verse a little faster and with the chords Am G Em F (barred), instead of F then Em. Great potential in most songs, but like they said more time...............

Eh?


Listen, I'm not gonna go down this road again with U2 armchair "musician" quarterbacks.......

what are you talking about? Am G.......yeah, I know the chords to the tune dude. What are you suggesting? An alternate chord sequence? Then do us all a favor and put up a youtube video showing us your idea.
How you're describing it is confusing.

 

[pepokiss]

maybe he likes Rush

 

[dan_smee]

Yeah POP bashing isn't cool. But the POP lovers should probably not get so defensive. The remakes were no good, except for Gone, which made it sound much more like the live version, which was a gerat thing (the guitar in the verse, primo example).

I don't think MAJOR tweaking would have been needed to "fix" the album, because it is a great album, with great tunes. The issues referred to (blip in LNOE, off-key bass in Please etc) should have been fixed, and if they were, it would probably be viewed as their 3rd best album

 

[dan_smee]

Eh?


Listen, I'm not gonna go down this road again with U2 armchair "musician" quarterbacks.......

what are you talking about? Am G.......yeah, I know the chords to the tune dude. What are you suggesting? An alternate chord sequence? Then do us all a favor and put up a youtube video showing us your idea.
How you're describing it is confusing.

How is it confusing, he's just suggesting switch the Em and the F and for people to try it at home to see how it sounds. Major decision with regards to recording the song, but im confused as to how this confuses you?

 

[JOFO]

Staring at the Sun has the wrong chord progression which is why it never worked & never will work no matter how many times its remixed. If any of you have an acoustic kicking round, try singing the verse a little faster and with the chords Am G Em F (barred), instead of F then Em.

Ok, it has the "wrong chord progression"? According to who?
I don't particulary like the Em to F instead of vice versa; it sounds like an uncompleted sentance. That's not what's wrong with the tune. In fact the tune is fine as is; it's just that it's not that great a tune to begin with.

But feel free to record your own tune with this chord progression; it's generic anyway.

 

[dan_smee]

Ok, it has the "wrong chord progression"? According to who?
I don't particulary like the Em to F instead of vice versa; it sounds like an uncompleted sentance. That's not what's wrong with the tune. In fact the tune is fine as is; it's just that it's not that great a tune to begin with.

But feel free to record your own tune with this chord progression; it's generic anyway.

while the wording was wrong, the sentiment stands - the song may have sounded better with a change in the progression

 

[JOFO]

ok, I was being alittle defensive of u2 and offensive to the original poster before....let me say this:
SATS sucks. It's not a good tune at all. No period of time, nor any minor change in chords, would've helped this piece.
This coming from a band of 20+ years at that point..... please.

 

[dan_smee]

ok, I was being alittle defensive of u2 and offensive to the original poster before....let me say this:
SATS sucks. It's not a good tune at all. No period of time, nor any minor change in chords, would've helped this piece.
This coming from a band of 20+ years at that point..... please.

agreed

its ok. but for a band of U2's quality, yeah it would be in my bottom 10

 

[JOFO]

yeah, that whole larry quote about how it could've been so great, etc....

get the fuck outta here; it sucks. we expect more from the composers of pride, streets, wowy, ishfwilf, the fly, one, and on and on except for this crap. sure it's ok as an album track, whatever....but you ruin it with a remix, and then say it could've bee massive given the time.....get the fuck outta here.......

 

[dan_smee]

yeah, that whole larry quote about how it could've been so great, etc....

get the fuck outta here; it sucks. we expect more from the composers of pride, streets, wowy, ishfwilf, the fly, one, and on and on except for this crap. sure it's ok as an album track, whatever....but you ruin it with a remix, and then say it could've bee massive given the time.....get the fuck outta here.......

haha probly woudnt have been quite so blunt about it, but yeah, was never guna set the world on fire. its all good though, because the new album will wipe the floor with it

 

[JOFO]

one would pray for such.ray:

 

[dan_smee]

indeed. In all, this interview from the Edge on the 20th was killer. Wooo, i love on topic conversation! lol

 

[sue4u2]

POP is fucking brilliant. I hate that the band ever has to apologize for this album.
Let this album be and never think about trying to re do it!!!

Why is this so hard to do??

We're not saying that Pop is not great.

Well. yes you are - obviously.

I totally agree with everyone that says the album is not completely polished and finished.

That being said, their are many brilliant moments throughout the album.

I just think the different sounds that were produced didn't allow the casual
U2 fan to relate, and therefore the album suffered in the charts.

The average fan won't notice the intricasies of a song.
It was a brilliant album,

Stick with one opinion of what you think. It's brilliant or "chart worthy".
Brittney is chart worthy.

Why do you care about the casual/average fan?

What "they" think about Pop will have no bearing on what is.

For that matter - myself and millions of others love this album, still.
Even if U2 think something is off, it's history now.
They have dealt with it so should everyone else.
k

 

[Salome]

I'm really curious to hear more specifically what examples you would reference for the above comments. I generally view your comments pretty favorably and value your opinion so it would be interesting to hear specifics. I totally agree with everyone that says the album is not completely polished and finished. I mean c'mon, the song Please starts with a baseline by Adam that is off key....among many other problems. That being said, their are many brilliant moments throughout the album. I just think the different sounds that were produced didn't allow the casual U2 fan to relate, and therefore the album suffered in the charts.

to be honest I don't find small edit issues etc too off putting
some small flaws like that can even end up adding some charm

to me the biggest flaw of POP was the way the band approached it - they got scared
I love MOFO, Please live was epic and the album version is good too, to me Do you feel loved and Velvet dress are very good album tracks, Miami worked really well and I even thought Discotheque was a great choice for a first single
on these songs the band aimed for something new and succeeded

somewhere along the line they got scared (for lack of better words) though and decided that the album needed some more 'vintage' U2 tracks so they added songs like Gone, Last night on earth, Staring at the Sun, If god ...
now, I don't rate any of these songs among the 30% best tracks U2 has done (even though Gone and Staring at the sun have some great lyrics), but what's even worse is that when trying to make these tracks sound more modern the production of these songs clashes with the essence of the song (well, IMO of course)
to me Staring at the Sun even improved dramatically when performed acoustically and I generally don't like it when U2 goes acoustic that much!

even more painful is that after the productional 'update' of these songs the album still sounds like 4 ep's thrown together
while the album does have some sort of lyrical theme it is musically incoherent

on a personal note I really rate If god ... and Playboy Mansion among U2's weakest output, mostly due to ill fitting lyrics (at least with Elevation the lyrics accompany a song meant to celebrate, I don't see why "the blind leading the blonde" "it's the stuff, the stuff of country songs" ever seemed a good idea to anyone)

after POP the band decided to set out a clear vision for the next album and follow it through and I would say it's hard for even the biggest All that you can't ... basher to argue they didn't succeed in that
the band did seem to feel All that you can't .... didn't rock enough so they tried to up the tempo on How to dismantle ...
unfortunately How to dismantle didn't manage to quite gel as an album and at certain points it sounds a bit too much like they are reproducing sounds from their own past
I'm looking forward to the band repairing those flaws on the next album

 

[U2girl]

"the album still sounds like 4 ep's thrown together" that about sums it up, plus the horrible production. It sounds like someone randomly copy pasted the vocals, guitars, bass, drums and bunch of bleeps and effects.

 

[mikal]

to be honest I don't find small edit issues etc too off putting
some small flaws like that can even end up adding some charm

to me the biggest flaw of POP was the way the band approached it - they got scared
I love MOFO, Please live was epic and the album version is good too, to me Do you feel loved and Velvet dress are very good album tracks, Miami worked really well and I even thought Discotheque was a great choice for a first single
on these songs the band aimed for something new and succeeded

somewhere along the line they got scared (for lack of better words) though and decided that the album needed some more 'vintage' U2 tracks so they added songs like Gone, Last night on earth, Staring at the Sun, If god ...
now, I don't rate any of these songs among the 30% best tracks U2 has done (even though Gone and Staring at the sun have some great lyrics), but what's even worse is that when trying to make these tracks sound more modern the production of these songs clashes with the essence of the song (well, IMO of course)
to me Staring at the Sun even improved dramatically when performed acoustically and I generally don't like it when U2 goes acoustic that much!

even more painful is that after the productional 'update' of these songs the album still sounds like 4 ep's thrown together
while the album does have some sort of lyrical theme it is musically incoherent

on a personal note I really rate If god ... and Playboy Mansion among U2's weakest output, mostly due to ill fitting lyrics (at least with Elevation the lyrics accompany a song meant to celebrate, I don't see why "the blind leading the blonde" "it's the stuff, the stuff of country songs" ever seemed a good idea to anyone)

after POP the band decided to set out a clear vision for the next album and follow it through and I would say it's hard for even the biggest All that you can't ... basher to argue they didn't succeed in that
the band did seem to feel All that you can't .... didn't rock enough so they tried to up the tempo on How to dismantle ...
unfortunately How to dismantle didn't manage to quite gel as an album and at certain points it sounds a bit too much like they are reproducing sounds from their own past
I'm looking forward to the band repairing those flaws on the next album

very spot on, IMO. though Gone is one of my faves.

 

[PowerSurge]

Why is this so hard to do??



Well. yes you are - obviously.




Stick with one opinion of what you think. It's brilliant or "chart worthy".
Brittney is chart worthy.

Why do you care about the casual/average fan?

What "they" think about Pop will have no bearing on what is.

For that matter - myself and millions of others love this album, still.
Even if U2 think something is off, it's history now.
They have dealt with it so should everyone else.
k

I'm curious why you've chosen to quote three DIFFERENT people's quotes and criticize them as if they were written by one person????

And BTW, I hear this whole "who cares about the casual fan?" argument alot on these U2 forums. Lets no be mistaken; if it weren't for the "casual" U2 fan, U2 wouldn't be where they are today, neither would any other significant rock act out there.

Just because these casual fans aren't trolling various U2 forums daily discussing every nuance of the band and their music ad nauseum doesn't mean that they have no bearing on the perceived "success" of the band. Lets face it, U2 have sold millions upon millions of albums worldwide. They are one of the most successful selling artists ever. Although their greatness can't be totally attributed to merely album sales...it does lend significant weight to the argument regarding their "greatness". And a large number of those millions upon millions of albums were bought by "casual fans".

So thats why I mentioned them in my comment. It bugs the hell out of me when supposed "true fans" put down "casual fans". I'm a "casual fan" of alot of music from a variety of artists...does that render me insignificant? Should I be excluded from intelligent conversations about Rush or Led Zeppelin because I don't know what Neil Peart's favorite color is, or what John Bonham's birthday was? Puh-lease! Let us all tone down our U2 snobbery for a second shall we?

 

[PowerSurge]

to be honest I don't find small edit issues etc too off putting
some small flaws like that can even end up adding some charm

to me the biggest flaw of POP was the way the band approached it - they got scared
I love MOFO, Please live was epic and the album version is good too, to me Do you feel loved and Velvet dress are very good album tracks, Miami worked really well and I even thought Discotheque was a great choice for a first single
on these songs the band aimed for something new and succeeded

somewhere along the line they got scared (for lack of better words) though and decided that the album needed some more 'vintage' U2 tracks so they added songs like Gone, Last night on earth, Staring at the Sun, If god ...
now, I don't rate any of these songs among the 30% best tracks U2 has done (even though Gone and Staring at the sun have some great lyrics), but what's even worse is that when trying to make these tracks sound more modern the production of these songs clashes with the essence of the song (well, IMO of course)
to me Staring at the Sun even improved dramatically when performed acoustically and I generally don't like it when U2 goes acoustic that much!

even more painful is that after the productional 'update' of these songs the album still sounds like 4 ep's thrown together
while the album does have some sort of lyrical theme it is musically incoherent

on a personal note I really rate If god ... and Playboy Mansion among U2's weakest output, mostly due to ill fitting lyrics (at least with Elevation the lyrics accompany a song meant to celebrate, I don't see why "the blind leading the blonde" "it's the stuff, the stuff of country songs" ever seemed a good idea to anyone)

after POP the band decided to set out a clear vision for the next album and follow it through and I would say it's hard for even the biggest All that you can't ... basher to argue they didn't succeed in that
the band did seem to feel All that you can't .... didn't rock enough so they tried to up the tempo on How to dismantle ...
unfortunately How to dismantle didn't manage to quite gel as an album and at certain points it sounds a bit too much like they are reproducing sounds from their own past
I'm looking forward to the band repairing those flaws on the next album

Very well put. I agree with a lot of what you said. They did get scared and they pulled back. The result was an album that seemed like it was too little of one thing and not enough of another...if that makes sense. They should either have fully gone down that road of experimentation full tilt or turn the car around and make a more straight forward album like the eventual album they made afterwards (ATYCLB). I wasn't looking for every song on POP to sound like MOFO or Miami, but I think songs like LNOE and SATS didn't belong on that album. I've never thought that they fit with the rest of the album, or to borrow your word "gel"; they didn't seem to gel. (great word)

You make another great comment about HTDAAB not "gelling", which I agree with. But I don't think they'll need to repair the "flaws" from that album on this next one because its not necessarily a case of repairing "flaws", because that gives the impression that HTDAAB could have been "fixed". Hey, it is what it is. They went back and tried to "fix of the flaws" on POP with the reissue and look what happened.

I think the next album will be more of a "lets just take what we've learned and make the type of album that we couldn't make at any other time in our careers because we had to go through all of that previous crap to get to this point" kind of record.

hopefully it'll be well worth the wait.

 

[Sleep Over Jack]

Excellent interview, and it sounds like the band have more songs/ideas than they know what to do with, which is a healthy position to be in.