SOI autopsy - what went wrong?

[Nick66]

It's always something isn't it? Pop would have been more popular if they (take your pick) chose MOFO as the first single and not dressed up as the Village People. NLOTH would have been more popular if they only made (take your pick) Magnificent/MOS/Mercy the first single. SOI would be more popular if only (take your pick) they hadn't fu**ed up the release method, Bono not be injured, and they'd made Crystal Ballroom the first single. Oh, and the magical week on Fallon that would supposedly have cured everything (how did the week on Letterman do for NLOTH)?

For some reason, U2 fans can't accept that maybe people just didn't respond to the music the way they did. It doesn't matter if you like the music or not, it doesn't take a marketing executive to look out onto the landscape and see that no one outside the fan base it talking about U2. No one (relatively speaking) cares about their new music.

I can't see how U2 is happy with this release. The goal wasn't to get the record into as many hands as possible, that was just a means to their oft-stated goal, which is to be relevant and popular again. How did that work out?

And I don't think just pointing any of this out is "negative". It is what it is. I love U2, but not so much that I'm blinded to what's happened with them with this record. And the tour, of course, will do spectacularly, and would have even if they never released SOI.

 

[mikal]

U2 has the following reasons to be happy with this release:

1. The release method gave SOI more reach than their previous album by millions of people.

2. The release strategy resulted in their back catalogue seeing a huge boost in sales.

3. The release strategy made hipsters look really dumb, which is always welcome.

4. Acoustic EBW

5. EBW charting better than the NLOTH singles with little promotion.

6. The album is really good.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[U2girl]

I'll bite, as this is a favorite topic of mine!

The question I keep wondering is why U2 basically shut down after Bono's accident? I get it, Bono is out for awhile. Give him the time he needs to get rested up and recover. This is where Edge, Adam and Larry needed to step up. Go on Fallon and do an interview, maybe even play a couple U2 songs with Edge singing? Actually try to push and promote a single, since they have a song as good as EBW. Do SOMETHING to promote the fact that they currently have shows on sale that aren't sold out.

Guy O and the new management team are a joke. Fire that fucker and get somebody else who gives a shit!

Maybe they're being quiet on purpose, but I'd think with a tour coming up they'd want to at least create SOME buzz.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

I keep wondering why now, of all times in the last two years, U2 should hop up in action ? How many bands go full throttle in promo mode when the singer's MIA ? What...have the Edge sing lead ? No thanks. Substitu2es ? No thanks, it was bad enough on AIDS day. (now there was a chance to play new material that arguably suit the guest singers more. Give Bruce a stab at Cedarwood road. Let Martin try SFS.)

Fallon may - or not, given the opinions about the acoustic promos on the forums - have help(ed) the album in US. But alas...here's to better luck with SOE and a better lead single.

Till then, bring on the tour.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7EK7g2n9RU

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

i think pushing the album sets it up for failure.

they dramatically underestimated the notion of choice when it comes to how we enjoy what we consume. the album could have been Joshua Tree and there would have been people talking about how awful it was because they didn't have the chance to discover it for themselves.

what sells music more than "buzz," or what is really "buzz," is word-of-mouth -- every December i read NPR's round up of the best albums of the year and then i investiate them on my own. i'm simply not the music consumer i was 15 years ago and i need help staying current. i'll admit it. i'm no longer cool. but the important thing that happens is that i take the advice of a trusted source (NPR, certain people in here, other friends) and then investigate on my own and decide whether or not to pursue the album, which usually means i'll like the album more because i did some work on my end.

i have several friends -- one of whom was a fan back to 1981 -- who were all U2 fans and now refer to them as a "once great band." while we can debate the quality of SOI, my gut tells me that the pushing of the album set the band up for failure because if it wasn't as good as the pinnacle of their past work (it isn't) then it's a disappointment.

maybe this Apple thing really wasn't well thought it. but given the fact that the album wasn't done until days (hours?) before the release, and it seems to have imposed the deadline the band needed, maybe it all happened far too quickly in August 2014. it was innovative and new (a step beyond Beyonce), and these repercussions are now only known in hindsight.

That's if you actually believe the "we finished it a couple days ago and here it is" narrative, which I don't buy at all.

 

[BVS]

I actually feel sorry for any U2 fan that doesn't like this album, it's far superior to anything they've done since Pop. Especially any fan that liked any of U2's 2000s releases.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[Mack_Again]

Only thing I don't like about could be thing about Danger Mouse, who's involved in most "indie" artists like Black Keys and Jack White. I thought U2 could've produced themselves.

 

[Mack_Again]

Personally, I don't like the album that much, but I still got to admit that this was best they could do as the album was appropriate for where they're at (as an experienced musician), and songs sounded great. It was better than some albums like How to.... as many of them sounded like they're trying too hard in a wrong direction.

 

[Irvine511]

That's if you actually believe the "we finished it a couple days ago and here it is" narrative, which I don't buy at all.

what do you think happened?

 

[digitize]

I actually feel sorry for any U2 fan that doesn't like this album, it's far superior to anything they've done since Pop. Especially any fan that liked any of U2's 2000s releases.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

Thanks for your sympathy.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[ozeeko]

I actually feel sorry for any U2 fan that doesn't like this album, it's far superior to anything they've done since Pop. Especially any fan that liked any of U2's 2000s releases.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

I disagree. ATYCLB is the more cohesive, better album. Although SOI has some ballsier numbers, it is a bit too mixed-up for me to see it as one cohesive work. It's definitely in 2nd place though in post-Pop land.

(everything above was my opinion)

 

[elevated_u2_fan]

The Problem I have with the incredible amount of negativity around here (and that's saying something for this place) is the prevailing sense that this album is completely dead and all hope is lost. I mean, look at the thread title, the album isn't even a year old and we're already conducting an autopsy and trying to assign blame to what killed it.

I'm not saying it's going to become their all-time greatest selling album or suddenly rocket back into the mainstream but come on here, it still has a chance to become something.

Once Bono is up and running (or peddling) and the paternity test on Leo comes back negative what exactly is stopping them from doing another promotion blitz? Is there some sort of official rule that states that if an album does not sell X amount in the first couple of months all is lost? That a single has to have promotion applied at the exact correct amount at the exact prescribed time frame from when it was released to be a success?

I'm honestly confused here, are they completely out of time to promote this album and try to salvage at least some sort of goodwill? Is there some sort of expiry date on this that I am unaware of?

 

[thavidesco]

I disagree. ATYCLB is the more cohesive, better album. Although SOI has some ballsier numbers, it is a bit too mixed-up for me to see it as one cohesive work. It's definitely in 2nd place though in post-Pop land.

(everything above was my opinion)

Atyclb ? The worst album since... the band started to exist ? No way!
Pop? Unfinished experiment that didn´t work out?
NLOTH? ALbum that doesn´t know what it wants to be?
Bomb? Collection of singles with terrible mix?

No,no,no.

I wouldn´t regret any of those albums if it had poor public reaction.

BUT:

Song of Innocence is THE REAL THING. So it is the eternal shame things happened the way it happened

 

[mikal]

I wouldn't say that I feel sorry for anyone that doesn't like the album. I mean, everyone has a right to an opinion. With that said, some of the extremes and/or stating your opinions as if they're facts written in stone are getting ridiculous.

It's not a fact that the album is mediocre/bad.

It's also not a fact that the album was a failure.

It's all about perspective. For me personally, SOI is the first album since POP that doesn't have a song that I want to burn, then shit on, maybe pee a little too, and then burn again. That's a big deal to me. I also don't agree that it doesn't have the big songs. Reach Around, EBW, Iris, and The Doubles are songs that will most likely remain in my top U2 song lists.

And again, everyone wants to argue that the band fucked up by not putting Crystal Ballroom on the album. Hey, how about instead of being douchy and crying about it, be happy that we actually got a great B-Side/Bonus Track? I don't see people slamming the band over and over for not putting Love Comes Tumbling on TUF, though I personally think that's a bigger ommission and a better song than The Crystal Ballroom.

Also, another reason why this place is going down the shitter is because you keep overdramatizing the album release method. Why can't the argument be more about how happy you were that one day you woke up, heard the rumors that U2 might be at an Apple event and suddenly you were given U2's new album? But let's instead talk about how it was a failure because a bunch of teenagers tweeted about it between popping their zits because that's what really matters.

The day U2 surprise released their album was one of the coolest days of my U2 fandom and happened at a time where some personal challenges were getting pretty intense, so I'll always have a strong emotional connection to the album.

 

[mikal]

So yeah, my point is, maybe if some of you always stopped looking for the negative in everything, you might actually learn to enjoy U2.

Maybe this place needs to change the color scheme to a happier, warmer color.

 

[thavidesco]

I wouldn't say that I feel sorry for anyone that doesn't like the album. I mean, everyone has a right to an opinion. With that said, some of the extremes and/or stating your opinions as if they're facts written in stone are getting ridiculous.

It's not a fact that the album is mediocre/bad.

It's also not a fact that the album was a failure.

It's all about perspective. For me personally, SOI is the first album since POP that doesn't have a song that I want to burn, then shit on, maybe pee a little too, and then burn again. That's a big deal to me. I also don't agree that it doesn't have the big songs. Reach Around, EBW, Iris, and The Doubles are songs that will most likely remain in my top U2 song lists.

And again, everyone wants to argue that the band fucked up by not putting Crystal Ballroom on the album. Hey, how about instead of being douchy and crying about it, be happy that we actually got a great B-Side/Bonus Track? I don't see people slamming the band over and over for not putting Love Comes Tumbling on TUF, though I personally think that's a bigger ommission and a better song than The Crystal Ballroom.

Also, another reason why this place is going down the shitter is because you keep overdramatizing the album release method. Why can't the argument be more about how happy you were that one day you woke up, heard the rumors that U2 might be at an Apple event and suddenly you were given U2's new album? But let's instead talk about how it was a failure because a bunch of teenagers tweeted about it between popping their zits because that's what really matters.

The day U2 surprise released their album was one of the coolest days of my U2 fandom and happened at a time where some personal challenges were getting pretty intense, so I'll always have a strong emotional connection to the album.

I agree with you that the release method was the coolest thing to do. If nothing, it only revealed how many silly people live in this world.

I think you are also right about Ballroom, that it doesn´t fit on the record. Anyway I can´t stop thinking it would be groundbreaking single

 

[mikal]

I agree with you that the release method was the coolest thing to do. If nothing, it only revealed how many silly people live in this world.

I think you are also right about Ballroom, that it doesn´t fit on the record. Anyway I can´t stop thinking it would be groundbreaking single

Yeah, I still think it could be released as a single, and U2 could tie it in with SOI since it's technically a bonus track. Like any other U2 song though, I just don't think it will break through pop radio. And that's not U2's fault, other than that they're old and generally 55 year olds aren't featured on the latest "Now That's What I Call Music" cd's.

 

[BANZAI]

I wouldn't say that I feel sorry for anyone that doesn't like the album. I mean, everyone has a right to an opinion. With that said, some of the extremes and/or stating your opinions as if they're facts written in stone are getting ridiculous.

It's not a fact that the album is mediocre/bad.

It's also not a fact that the album was a failure.

It's all about perspective. For me personally, SOI is the first album since POP that doesn't have a song that I want to burn, then shit on, maybe pee a little too, and then burn again. That's a big deal to me. I also don't agree that it doesn't have the big songs. Reach Around, EBW, Iris, and The Doubles are songs that will most likely remain in my top U2 song lists.

And again, everyone wants to argue that the band fucked up by not putting Crystal Ballroom on the album. Hey, how about instead of being douchy and crying about it, be happy that we actually got a great B-Side/Bonus Track? I don't see people slamming the band over and over for not putting Love Comes Tumbling on TUF, though I personally think that's a bigger ommission and a better song than The Crystal Ballroom.

Also, another reason why this place is going down the shitter is because you keep overdramatizing the album release method. Why can't the argument be more about how happy you were that one day you woke up, heard the rumors that U2 might be at an Apple event and suddenly you were given U2's new album? But let's instead talk about how it was a failure because a bunch of teenagers tweeted about it between popping their zits because that's what really matters.

The day U2 surprise released their album was one of the coolest days of my U2 fandom and happened at a time where some personal challenges were getting pretty intense, so I'll always have a strong emotional connection to the album.

This.

IMO Songs of Innocence happens to be the best album since Achtung Baby, although it isn't as innovative as Zooropa and Pop. But it doesn't have any clunckers like those albums do have.

It doesn't matter a f*** to me if SOI isn't as succesfull as it could be. It's all about my own opinion about this album. It's not a masterpiece but which album is nowadays...

 

[CosmoKramer]

I wouldn't say that I feel sorry for anyone that doesn't like the album. I mean, everyone has a right to an opinion. With that said, some of the extremes and/or stating your opinions as if they're facts written in stone are getting ridiculous.



It's not a fact that the album is mediocre/bad.



It's also not a fact that the album was a failure.



It's all about perspective. For me personally, SOI is the first album since POP that doesn't have a song that I want to burn, then shit on, maybe pee a little too, and then burn again. That's a big deal to me. I also don't agree that it doesn't have the big songs. Reach Around, EBW, Iris, and The Doubles are songs that will most likely remain in my top U2 song lists.



And again, everyone wants to argue that the band fucked up by not putting Crystal Ballroom on the album. Hey, how about instead of being douchy and crying about it, be happy that we actually got a great B-Side/Bonus Track? I don't see people slamming the band over and over for not putting Love Comes Tumbling on TUF, though I personally think that's a bigger ommission and a better song than The Crystal Ballroom.



Also, another reason why this place is going down the shitter is because you keep overdramatizing the album release method. Why can't the argument be more about how happy you were that one day you woke up, heard the rumors that U2 might be at an Apple event and suddenly you were given U2's new album? But let's instead talk about how it was a failure because a bunch of teenagers tweeted about it between popping their zits because that's what really matters.



The day U2 surprise released their album was one of the coolest days of my U2 fandom and happened at a time where some personal challenges were getting pretty intense, so I'll always have a strong emotional connection to the album.

I posted right before the surprise release that as U2 fans this was an amazing time for us because we knew something was coming. Then it came and it was a surprise album which, for me, was an incredible album. I still stand by the fact that since September it is an incredible time to be a U2 fan.

If not for the bike accident, we were on tap for a week of Fallon that would most likely have been more than music (i.e. fun skits), a surprise NYC televised concert, U2 headlining the KROQ Christmas Concert (whatever it's called) and a Grammy Performance!

U2 were really ready to deliver to their fans what fans of most artists only dream of....lots of content!

To your point, prior to the bike accident when most of this was known or rumored, people were still shitting all over some of these things. There was actually a discussion on this site (a U2 fan site) of why it sucked that U2 were playing KROQ due to XYZ.

On a more positive note, we have a massive world tour coming that is named after what we are to believe is not only SOI but it's sister album. It's very possible that another album will be released within the next year or so and just as possible that they will preview some of these new songs on tour prior to the albums release....yet more things to be excited about possibly happening.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[corianderstem]

This shiny, happy version of Mikal is freaking me out.

 

[mikal]

http://youtu.be/whoB89oGoIk


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[LemonMelon]

I actually feel sorry for any U2 fan that doesn't like this album, it's far superior to anything they've done since Pop. Especially any fan that liked any of U2's 2000s releases.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

No need to dole out pity. There are thousands of other records to listen to instead of SOI if it's not your thing.

I'm late to the party, so I'll just boil it down to two factors: 1) the release method turned a lot of people off, 2) the music did not receive the feedback necessary (either from critics or the general public) to turn things around and foster word of mouth.

Unlike some in this thread, I don't think most listeners would have hastily deleted a new Joshua Tree out of spite. More likely, listeners heard The Miracle of Joey Ramone and moved on. I would have done the same if I weren't a fan.

But it's always something, isn't it? It's tough to blame the music when you love it. I'm always on the other end of the Pop debate. That's a terrific record IMO and the public was lukewarm to it. But it is what it is.

 

[Mrs. Garrison]

U2 should have just retired with McGuinness. <---

I mean seriously. Don't know what you got.. .. .. ..till you don't got it no more ((drama)).

This whole thing is nuts. Sure the band is quiet right now thanks to the bike fiasco tragedy. And before that it was the plane fiasco near tragedy. Before that it was the album release fiasco tragedy. Before that it was the album delay fiasco tragedy. Before that it was the losing the Oscar tragedy fuckup.

I don't recall what happened before that because i was still in the slammer. The pound-me-in-the-

No actually, i was locked up in the psych ward for something i can't talk about. Yes im nuts. Believe it.

U2 should have retired with the 360 Tour. The biggest baddest ever tour. Why? Cause that was a high note? No. Cause we don't need them damn spyplanes anymore. We have drones. Why do we need them when we have drones? Thats the deal.

Not really but it's symbolic. Okay not really that either.

Maybe because people are stupid. U2 fans especially included. Damned if you do, fucked if you don't.

Why does every damn thing have to be the 'the mother of all albums'? Yes, we get that youtwo were once called 'the hype'. But there is a thing about 2much Hype. Stop reapplying for the job. Let someone else tap that ass for a change.

are we still talking about the same thing here?

Oh. And contrary to everything i have just said. I do love sONGS Of iNNOCENCE, but i do wish for some more fireworks. I mean, you have a guitar player who is called 'The Edge', well, let's hear that bad boy. Stop being so boring. Bring back the 747 sound or whatever the hell this guy was on about during the 90s.

Or don't, keep playing with cheese & crackers. Leave the fire for the cold souls.

@ least these guys aren't AEROSMITH. That would be shit. Looking through their back catalogue.. .. .. ..there's a lot of stuff to hang on your wall and wrap a ring around your cock to.

Its all good.

 

[DaveC]

I wouldn't say that I feel sorry for anyone that doesn't like the album. I mean, everyone has a right to an opinion. With that said, some of the extremes and/or stating your opinions as if they're facts written in stone are getting ridiculous.

It's not a fact that the album is mediocre/bad.

It's also not a fact that the album was a failure.

It's all about perspective. For me personally, SOI is the first album since POP that doesn't have a song that I want to burn, then shit on, maybe pee a little too, and then burn again. That's a big deal to me. I also don't agree that it doesn't have the big songs. Reach Around, EBW, Iris, and The Doubles are songs that will most likely remain in my top U2 song lists.

And again, everyone wants to argue that the band fucked up by not putting Crystal Ballroom on the album. Hey, how about instead of being douchy and crying about it, be happy that we actually got a great B-Side/Bonus Track? I don't see people slamming the band over and over for not putting Love Comes Tumbling on TUF, though I personally think that's a bigger ommission and a better song than The Crystal Ballroom.

Also, another reason why this place is going down the shitter is because you keep overdramatizing the album release method. Why can't the argument be more about how happy you were that one day you woke up, heard the rumors that U2 might be at an Apple event and suddenly you were given U2's new album? But let's instead talk about how it was a failure because a bunch of teenagers tweeted about it between popping their zits because that's what really matters.

The day U2 surprise released their album was one of the coolest days of my U2 fandom and happened at a time where some personal challenges were getting pretty intense, so I'll always have a strong emotional connection to the album.

Fuck off out of here with your optimism, logic, and well-thought-out rationale.

In here we deal strictly in hyperbole, bullshit, and hysterics.

 

[bobsaget77]

Tracklisting is by far the biggest issue with this album and it isn't even close.
Excluding TCB and Invisible is just flat out disgraceful and the order by which the tracks are placed is pretty awful too; that has a lot to do with excluding TCB and Invisible.
I really think that hurt the album big time. Not everyone is a diehard U2 fan like us and bought all the tracks and rearranged them ourselves. Most people don't even know that 2 of the best songs they've made in the last 15 years even exist. You kick that sucker off with Invisible and that gets people's attention. You put TCB on the album, it'll get people's attention.
However, if you release your lead single type song as a hidden track on a bonus disc....no one is going to listen. You release your disco, experimental lead single type song on an acoustic bonus disc...no one is going to listen.
If they would've properly executed this, it would've been a much better received album.
I still believe that TCB can be a big hit for them. It doesn't sound like the U2 that many of the millennial generation have heard and that could make the song popular.
Oh, and the release of this album was ballsy and brilliant, the bonus disc was a really nice addition, and Reach, Cedarwood, and EBW are pretty frickin great.
Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[popacrobat]

Making Invisible the lead track makes no difference. Theoretically, anybody who wanted to hear Invisible had already heard it by then, since they gave it away for free last year. Starting off an album six months later with a song they already gave you isn't going to get anybody's attention.

 

[Zoocoustic]

1) They should never have done the whole apple thing. They looked like corporate sell-outs, "dads band", and desperate. They will never live that moment down. Ever.

2) The album is their best in 10 years, but is still far short of what they were capable of during their peak years. They just aren't as good as they used to be.

3) They are still far too worried about being and staying relevant in the Top 40 scene. Incredible they were able to still make noise in that world as recently as HTDAAB, but they are way, waaaaaaaaay past ever being relevant in the Top 40. They should be focused on the music. Unfortunately they quit doing that 15 years ago when ATYCLB was released.

All just one person's opinion, of course.

 

[VintagePunk]

U2 has the following reasons to be happy with this release:

1. The release method gave SOI more reach than their previous album by millions of people.

2. The release strategy resulted in their back catalogue seeing a huge boost in sales.

3. The release strategy made hipsters look really dumb, which is always welcome.

4. Acoustic EBW

5. EBW charting better than the NLOTH singles with little promotion.

6. The album is really good.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Problem I have with the incredible amount of negativity around here (and that's saying something for this place) is the prevailing sense that this album is completely dead and all hope is lost. I mean, look at the thread title, the album isn't even a year old and we're already conducting an autopsy and trying to assign blame to what killed it.

I'm not saying it's going to become their all-time greatest selling album or suddenly rocket back into the mainstream but come on here, it still has a chance to become something.

Once Bono is up and running (or peddling) and the paternity test on Leo comes back negative what exactly is stopping them from doing another promotion blitz? Is there some sort of official rule that states that if an album does not sell X amount in the first couple of months all is lost? That a single has to have promotion applied at the exact correct amount at the exact prescribed time frame from when it was released to be a success?

I'm honestly confused here, are they completely out of time to promote this album and try to salvage at least some sort of goodwill? Is there some sort of expiry date on this that I am unaware of?

I wouldn't say that I feel sorry for anyone that doesn't like the album. I mean, everyone has a right to an opinion. With that said, some of the extremes and/or stating your opinions as if they're facts written in stone are getting ridiculous.

It's not a fact that the album is mediocre/bad.

It's also not a fact that the album was a failure.

It's all about perspective. For me personally, SOI is the first album since POP that doesn't have a song that I want to burn, then shit on, maybe pee a little too, and then burn again. That's a big deal to me. I also don't agree that it doesn't have the big songs. Reach Around, EBW, Iris, and The Doubles are songs that will most likely remain in my top U2 song lists.

And again, everyone wants to argue that the band fucked up by not putting Crystal Ballroom on the album. Hey, how about instead of being douchy and crying about it, be happy that we actually got a great B-Side/Bonus Track? I don't see people slamming the band over and over for not putting Love Comes Tumbling on TUF, though I personally think that's a bigger ommission and a better song than The Crystal Ballroom.

Also, another reason why this place is going down the shitter is because you keep overdramatizing the album release method. Why can't the argument be more about how happy you were that one day you woke up, heard the rumors that U2 might be at an Apple event and suddenly you were given U2's new album? But let's instead talk about how it was a failure because a bunch of teenagers tweeted about it between popping their zits because that's what really matters.

The day U2 surprise released their album was one of the coolest days of my U2 fandom and happened at a time where some personal challenges were getting pretty intense, so I'll always have a strong emotional connection to the album.

So yeah, my point is, maybe if some of you always stopped looking for the negative in everything, you might actually learn to enjoy U2.

Maybe this place needs to change the color scheme to a happier, warmer color.

I posted right before the surprise release that as U2 fans this was an amazing time for us because we knew something was coming. Then it came and it was a surprise album which, for me, was an incredible album. I still stand by the fact that since September it is an incredible time to be a U2 fan.

If not for the bike accident, we were on tap for a week of Fallon that would most likely have been more than music (i.e. fun skits), a surprise NYC televised concert, U2 headlining the KROQ Christmas Concert (whatever it's called) and a Grammy Performance!

U2 were really ready to deliver to their fans what fans of most artists only dream of....lots of content!

To your point, prior to the bike accident when most of this was known or rumored, people were still shitting all over some of these things. There was actually a discussion on this site (a U2 fan site) of why it sucked that U2 were playing KROQ due to XYZ.

On a more positive note, we have a massive world tour coming that is named after what we are to believe is not only SOI but it's sister album. It's very possible that another album will be released within the next year or so and just as possible that they will preview some of these new songs on tour prior to the albums release....yet more things to be excited about possibly happening.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

I'm basically going to block everyone else, and this forum will consist of you guys. And Mrs. Garrison, because I like his stories. But that's it. So get posting, and keep me entertained.

 

[marshall faulk]

IMO SOI is easily U2's best album since Pop.

I also believe there is not a SINGLE song in the U2 catalog that would be a "hit" if it was released by the band for the first time in 2014 or 2015 under the circumstances that SOI was released and subsequently promoted. Not One, not Streets, not WOWY, not BD...none of them.

 

[MrPryck2U]

You first, V-Punk. Entertain me!

 

[VintagePunk]

You first, V-Punk. Entertain me!

Dude. You're not on my list. Give me a reason. The ball is in your court.