So Whats Wrong With NLOTH

[Headache in a Suitcase]

the problem is they released the wrong first single. it didn't hit, so the album isn't a smash.

if they can market their way into a hit single, the album will be a lock for the grammys in 2010.

it's also tearing apart the u2 community... those who want them to be some crap progressive rock radiohead type band vs. those who are fine with the pop side, 'cause the album contains both.

those rational thinking fans who can see both sides quite enjoy it.

 

[popshopper]

it's also tearing apart the u2 community... those who want them to be some crap progressive rock radiohead type band vs. those who are fine with the pop side, 'cause the album contains both.

those rational thinking fans who can see both sides quite enjoy it.

The problem with the mix of the two certainly in the way NLOTH has it is the album ends up with no flow. It's like 3 disperate ep's (tracks 1-4, tracks 5-7, tracks 8-11), it's clunky and hurts the album far more than the 'poppy' tracks help. There's nothing rational about that. You want a poppy album then U2 are more than capable of that, you want a experimental album then they've shown they can do that as well. What they struggle with is trying to mix both in same album. What they really should have been doing is a more serious attempt to mix the two within the songs themselves, the multiple producers didn't help, you have the layered eno-esque songs which are 'experiemental' and the straightforward Lillywhite stuff which is far more direct.

 

[bram]

the problem is they released the wrong first single. it didn't hit, so the album isn't a smash.

if they can market their way into a hit single, the album will be a lock for the grammys in 2010.

it's also tearing apart the u2 community... those who want them to be some crap progressive rock radiohead type band vs. those who are fine with the pop side, 'cause the album contains both.

those rational thinking fans who can see both sides quite enjoy it.

If only U2 had listened to us last summer...most of us knew Magnificent should have been the lead single

 

[last unicorn]

The problem with the mix of the two certainly in the way NLOTH has it is the album ends up with no flow. It's like 3 disperate ep's (tracks 1-4, tracks 5-7, tracks 8-11), it's clunky and hurts the album far more than the 'poppy' tracks help. There's nothing rational about that. You want a poppy album then U2 are more than capable of that, you want a experimental album then they've shown they can do that as well. What they struggle with is trying to mix both in same album. What they really should have been doing is a more serious attempt to mix the two within the songs themselves, the multiple producers didn't help, you have the layered eno-esque songs which are 'experiemental' and the straightforward Lillywhite stuff which is far more direct.

The album absolutely flows for me, there is no track I skip and everything is in its right place. I feel the album totally needs these three songs and for me, there's nothing disperate.

In fact, I love the different feelings the mix brings up and it all fits into a concept.

I wouldn't want to miss one single song, not Boots, which I like a lot, and also not Crazy Tonight, which is my least favourite song on there, still I feel it belongs there. I see the album as a whole, for me it's coherent, I always listen to it start to finish and don't feel it's falling apart. Crazy Tonight is the only "pop" song on there, and since U2 are good at doing this stuff and the other stuff, I think it's ok they got both on the album.

 

[last unicorn]

If only U2 had listened to us last summer...most of us knew Magnificent should have been the lead single

To be honest, people liked Boots a lot when they heard it as the beach clip.
And most people here still liked Boots when it came out back in January.
Strangely, all this bashing of Boots just came with the album.
Not for me, I still like the song and think it fits very well.

 

[popacrobat]

Strangely, all this bashing of Boots just came with the album.

I am one of the ones who really like Boots very much. That said, the bashing of Boots came the day it was released. People thought it's Vertigo 2.0 (Elevation 3.0), thought it was a poor choice for lead single, had a tough time getting into it, etc. While I do believe it's a very good rock song, it didn't hit as much as it should have. You can blame that on the song, you can blame that on what radio has become these days or whatever.

was it a bad choice? i don't think it was a bad choice. if I'm playing monday morning armchair quarterback here, I'd probably release the title track first to be honest. It's a bit different, it's a rock song, and has a really good/great climax in the middle with some excellent lyrics, and the song title is the same as the album so it would easily stick well. I'd still release Boots as a single, but probably single #3 or 4 or something.

edit: i'd save magnificent still for the #2 single. I think the second single is probably the most important one on the whole album. it sustains the sales and keeps the band in the headlines.

 

[bram]

To be honest, people liked Boots a lot when they heard it as the beach clip.
And most people here still liked Boots when it came out back in January.
Strangely, all this bashing of Boots just came with the album.
Not for me, I still like the song and think it fits very well.

Yeah but it's all relative--Boots was BY FAR the least favorite of the beach clips. By far. Go back and look at all the comments from that time. Did a few people like it better than some of the others? Sure.

I still like the song a lot--it was just a poor lead single choice from a sales/hype perspective. Since the only real point of releasing singles is to increase album sales and hype and radio play, then it can be seen as an unwise move--there are at least 3-4 songs that would have served those purposes better, as we are already seeing with Magnificent moving up the charts.

 

[believer75]

To be honest, people liked Boots a lot when they heard it as the beach clip.
And most people here still liked Boots when it came out back in January.
Strangely, all this bashing of Boots just came with the album.
Not for me, I still like the song and think it fits very well.

Boots is a strong song....saw the video on TV the first time this morning, MTV hits.....it sounds and looks great!! I think it is a great U2 rocker. When U2 does rock, some people complain. When U2 does not rock, some people complain. But, that "some" I am speaking of is really only a few people here. They try to have the loudest voices, though, but it does not do anything to squash the majority's excitement. Heck, it may all be the same person opening an account with a different name/avatar/location, etc, you know, having negative U2 bashing conversations with themselves. There is no way to know that for sure, though...haha.
Boots is a solid song, I will still stand by that. I think the Edge is in fine form in this song AND in Stand Up Comedy.

 

[popshopper]

The album absolutely flows for me, there is no track I skip and everything is in its right place. I feel the album totally needs these three songs and for me, there's nothing disperate.

In fact, I love the different feelings the mix brings up and it all fits into a concept.

I wouldn't want to miss one single song, not Boots, which I like a lot, and also not Crazy Tonight, which is my least favourite song on there, still I feel it belongs there. I see the album as a whole, for me it's coherent, I always listen to it start to finish and don't feel it's falling apart. Crazy Tonight is the only "pop" song on there, and since U2 are good at doing this stuff and the other stuff, I think it's ok they got both on the album.

I'm happy for you that you feel that way, but I fail to see how NLOTH can be viewed as coherent. The narrative of the songs veer wildly from 1st Person, 3rd person character studies to Bono singing about being Bono (which isn't a good thing), on a wide range of topics, with a bunch of the songs clearly produced by different folk at different times. Which is fine, it's doesn't have to be a concept album, but it lacks a unifying theme which U2's best work has always had at some level. Can anyone say what this album is about?

I actually like Crazy and Boots as songs quite a lot, but they simply don't work on the album for me. Stand Up Comedy ranks as one of the least inspired songs U2 have ever attempted and lyrically reads like some one has written a U2 parody which may be the Comedy from the title, but even if that's the case the joke is on Bono because he delivers most of the song especially the chorus straight-faced.

It's not a bad album by any stretch of the imagination, and is one of the best albums of the year already, but some ham-fisted lyrics (even in some of the best songs on the album) and a poor choice of song selection in the middle of the album stop it from being a great album for me. It's a great collection of songs for the most part but not a great album.

 

[Salome]

Joshua Tree has no flow
Achtung Baby really has no flow
POP has no flow
How to dismantle ... has no flow




I actually feel that compared to these albums the middle section on NLOTH actually makes more sense
at least on No Line it feels like they purposefully try to lift the mood for a bit
but I can see why others feel different

 

[roy]

Joshua Tree has no flow
Achtung Baby really has no flow
POP has no flow
How to dismantle ... has no flow




I actually feel that compared to these albums the middle section on NLOTH actually makes more sense
at least on No Line it feels like they purposefully try to lift the mood for a bit
but I can see why others feel different

Exactly; the same people who criticise the flow on NLOTH most probably proclaim that One, UTEOTW & WGRYWH are without doubt sonically cohesive

 

[ahittle]

Flow is a funny thing. I always saw U2 as a side A and side B band. They usually can put together a solid side A, but their great albums have solid side B's as well. For instance, ATYCLB has some of my less favored tracks on side B and that diminishes that record for me. But my favorite U2 records have good cuts buried deep into side B.

For me, JT's side A is all about flow. Side B is a collection of great songs with some pretty good sequencing, especially Exit into MOTD. But sometimes their side B tracks just don't fit together well.

Seems like NLOTH is the first U2 record that felt like it had a middle, not an A and B.

 

[believer75]

Exactly; the same people who criticise the flow on NLOTH most probably proclaim that One, UTEOTW & WGRYWH are without doubt sonically cohesive

Sonically, no, but, Achtung is lyrically and thematically cohesive, agreed?

I am still trying to grasp the overall themes of NLOTH, but my opinion so far is that it is non-linear, and striving for a different brand of cohesiveness, although not sure what that is just yet.

 

[ahittle]

Speaking of flow, I'm not exactly crazy about the Epic Slow Third Song slot on some of U2's records:

With or Without You
One
Sometimes You Can't Make It On Your Own
Moment of Surrender

Good songs all, and I can't imagine WOWY out of that slot, but sometimes they feel emotionally rushed on record, especially MOS - like an ultra-serious conversation moments after you've been introduced.

I'm surprised SIAMTYCGOO wasn't slotted at number three.

 

[roy]

Sonically, no, but, Achtung is lyrically and thematically cohesive, agreed?

What has UTEOTW got in common lyrically with WGRYWH, EBTTRT, TTTYAATW, even Zoo Station?

Sonically....don't even go there.

 

[catlhere]

I don't think any U2 album has every been completely cohesive sonically. There's always one track that has a slightly (or sometimes hugely) different feel than the rest. Even JT and AB, for me. Mysterious Ways sounds like it makes no sense with the rest of the tracks imo, but it's still a great song, so it works. People keep saying that their best work has had better lyrical cohesion as well. Yes, definitely. But then if theres a lyrical problem with cohesion in... for example UC->CT, I can't see it.

It would seem that after being lost and hopeless, and "at the top of the bottom", then getting the text instructions to better yourself, the only place to go would be up, thus having to "start out the climb. Which especially sounds great when you hear the church organ swell at the end of UC, and are welcomed in to a feeling of rejuvination in CT with the beautiful chiming guitar immediately after, like an epiphany.

It's like UC is the freefall nightmare where you wake up right before you hit the ground, and CT is the rocket ship that blasts you off in the opposite direction to the stratosphere. Perhaps the two extremes aren't an enjoyable transition for some though. Or maybe some just hate any song that reminds them of ATYCLB/HTDAAB.

The only song that seems totally different than the rest of the album is Boots, imo. But I still like boots a lot, and the "Let Me In The Sound" portion is worth it's place in the album alone.

 

[U2girl]

Inspiration for the album was Edge's divorce. Whole of AB could be seen as a story of a couple breaking up, Roy.

 

[roy]

Inspiration for the album was Edge's divorce. Whole of AB could be seen as a story of a couple breaking up.

Yes I know that. But lyrically how could you consider Zoo Station and UTEOTW lyrically cohesive without streching the bounds of reailty.

 

[BVS]

Inspiration for the album was Edge's divorce. Whole of AB could be seen as a story of a couple breaking up, Roy.

I think it may have inspired one or two songs, but not the whole album.

The Fly, UTEOTW, or ZooStation have nothing at all to do with Edge's divorce.

 

[U2girl]

Yes I know that. But lyrically how could you consider Zoo Station and UTEOTW cohesive without streching the bounds of reailty.

It could be done. That's always how AB worked to me, even before I knew anything about the events in Edge's life at the time.

 

[believer75]

What has UTEOTW got in common lyrically with WGRYWH, EBTTRT, TTTYAATW, even Zoo Station?

Sonically....don't even go there.

First of all, sorry to be off-topic.

To me, the theme of Achtung is about contradictions and balance. Contradictions of the spirit, contradictions of religion (from the different perspectives in UTEOTW)contradictions of love, contradictions of soul, contradictions of rock and roll (balancing excess and spirit), contradictions of themselves as a band (one but not the same), contradictions of sound and contradictions of image (Bono: it's a con). U2's sound, theme and image was not this way previously. All of the songs fit the wrapping paper. Lyrically and sonically U2 was exploring these contradictions. All of the songs could be about finding balance while still trying to enjoy the contradictions.

 

[BVS]

I don't think any U2 album has had a lyrical theme that was strong throughout. They've come close, but then always had two or three that broke away from the pack...

 

[roy]

First of all, sorry to be off-topic.

To me, the theme of Achtung is about contradictions and balance. Contradictions of the spirit, contradictions of religion (from the different perspectives in UTEOTW)contradictions of love, contradictions of soul, contradictions of rock and roll (balancing excess and spirit), contradictions of themselves as a band (one but not the same), contradictions of sound and contradictions of image (Bono: it's a con). U2's sound, theme and image was not this way previously. All of the songs fit the wrapping paper. Lyrically and sonically U2 was exploring these contradictions. All of the songs could be about finding balance while still trying to enjoy the contradictions.

Ah that makes sense. AB is lyrically cohesive because it isn't cohesive BUT that 's the point because it isn't f'**king supposed to be cohesive.

F**KING genius.

And there was me thinking that AB was just a mis mash of ideas with a third of the songs having a common theme.

 

[believer75]

Ah that makes sense. AB is lyrically cohesive because it isn't cohesive BUT that 's the point because it isn't f'**king supposed to be cohesive.

F**KING genius.

And there was me thinking that AB was just a mis mash of ideas with a third of the songs having a common theme.

Hey that's your dilemma. Enjoy the record the way you like. You are the smart one here. But, you already knew that, though, didn't you?

 

[popshopper]

What has UTEOTW got in common lyrically with WGRYWH, EBTTRT, TTTYAATW, even Zoo Station?

Sonically....don't even go there.

All on one level or another each of those about relationships, or the various parts of the relationship. The only song which isn't about a relationship on Achtung Baby is the Fly.

 

[popshopper]

I think it may have inspired one or two songs, but not the whole album.

The Fly, UTEOTW, or ZooStation have nothing at all to do with Edge's divorce.

Zoo Station is about starting anew.
And, at one level UTEOTW is the ultimate betrayal and breakup song.

 

[popshopper]

And the Joshua Tree was held together as an album essentially about America, warts and all. Where the lyrics didn't do that the music itself evoked American musical archetypes mainly a hint of country.

NLOTH makes fleeting looks towards the middle east but only on the songs that survived the post Fez bottle dropping.

 

[believer75]

Zoo Station is about starting anew.
And, at one level UTEOTW is the ultimate betrayal and breakup song.

I agree. The Fly-could it be about the relationship between a man or woman and their soul? Or, could also be about your relationship between your soul and the world.

 

[Salome]

To me, the theme of Achtung is about contradictions and balance.

it's not that I disagree, but in a way that theme covers just about U2's entire career

 

[believer75]

it's not that I disagree, but in a way that theme covers just about U2's entire career

I could agree with that. I personally see it most prominently in their work from 87-97. Achtung seems to be the most effective in that regard throughout the entire record.