SOI autopsy - what went wrong?

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
Autopsy implies a death.. yet I still have the album playing, I'm still enjoying the music. This album is still alive for me, and I don't believe it's worth killing just to open it up to looks for things that went 'wrong'.

Unless you're talking about public perception, the marketplace, 'relevance', radio play, and whatnot. In which case.. I thought we weren't supposed to care about that stuff anymore. Are we?




Sent from my fingertips.
 
Regarding random people getting around to checking out the download on their i-whatevers, there could be the germ of a good advertising campaign there.

"Songs of Innocence: It's Not That Bad"
 
VintagePunk said:
Something looks weird and off about him, and I can't put my finger on it. Maybe it's just an odd angle.

He definitely looks very, very thin. I blame Mikal.
Click to expand...

It's your brain preparing you for what is happening.


Look at his hair.


The greasemullet is making a return.


Vertigo tour II is happening.




:yikes:
 
Montrose said:
Autopsy implies a death.. yet I still have the album playing, I'm still enjoying the music. This album is still alive for me, and I don't believe it's worth killing just to open it up to looks for things that went 'wrong'.

Unless you're talking about public perception, the marketplace, 'relevance', radio play, and whatnot. In which case.. I thought we weren't supposed to care about that stuff anymore. Are we?




Sent from my fingertips.
Click to expand...

You make a good point. WE shouldn't care about that stuff. But when the band makes it so crystal clear that THEY care about it, it certainly warrants discussion when their plans to achieve it fall flat.
 
Headache in a Suitcase said:
You make a good point. WE shouldn't care about that stuff. But when the band makes it so crystal clear that THEY care about it, it certainly warrants discussion when their plans to achieve it fall flat.
Click to expand...

I feel like sometimes it distorts the picture, though.

Let's say 4 people taste a cake.
2 of them liked it, and 2 didn't.
But one of the 2 that did liked it, sees that the other 2 didn't and start saying that the cake was a failure/whatever.
Then the perception, for everyone involved, including the baker in case he's listening to his costumers, is that 3 out of 4 people didn't liked it, even when it was only 2/4.

---

I know that many people disliked the release method, but I didn't. I had absolutely no problem with it, personally. I got for free an album that I really wanted. Me.

You and others in here have critizised several times that release method, and that's ok, I'm not complaining, but is it because you actually had a problem with it, or is because OTHER people (no fans, just general public) had a problem with it? My guess is that is the second, but I may be wrong, so asking anyway.

Either way, my point is that when someone complains "in the name of" other people (in this context) distorts the perception of how bad/good it was... are the fans who critizise the release method complaining because of it? ("dammit, not even our fans were ok with it") or just because non-fans hated it? ("oh well, at least our fans were happy about it!")

---

We know what they say in the media, we kinda know what are their "big" goals, but we really don't have a clue about what were actually their expectatives or their plan to really know if it fell flat or not.
 
Bad Exit said:
I feel like sometimes it distorts the picture, though.

Let's say 4 people taste a cake.
2 of them liked it, and 2 didn't.
But one of the 2 that did liked it, sees that the other 2 didn't and start saying that the cake was a failure/whatever.
Then the perception, for everyone involved, including the baker in case he's listening to his costumers, is that 3 out of 4 people didn't liked it, even when it was only 2/4.

---

I know that many people disliked the release method, but I didn't. I had absolutely no problem with it, personally. I got for free an album that I really wanted. Me.

You and others in here have critizised several times that release method, and that's ok, I'm not complaining, but is it because you actually had a problem with it, or is because OTHER people (no fans, just general public) had a problem with it? My guess is that is the second, but I may be wrong, so asking anyway.

Either way, my point is that when someone complains "in the name of" other people (in this context) distorts the perception of how bad/good it was... are the fans who critizise the release method complaining because of it? ("dammit, not even our fans were ok with it") or just because non-fans hated it? ("oh well, at least our fans were happy about it!")

---

We know what they say in the media, we kinda know what are their "big" goals, but we really don't have a clue about what were actually their expectatives or their plan to really know if it fell flat or not.
Click to expand...

I have no idea what you just said, but now I'm hungry for cake.
 
I wonder what the percentages are on the release method. How many people liked/loved it, how many hated it, and how many didn't give a flying fuck. I've a feeling the latter is the largest group.

The release method isn't the reason why this album isn't liked by the masses.
 
mikal said:
LOL, and as far as I'm concerned, this person should be forced to live in Ethiopia for a couple months.

"I feel haunted and tortured," one poor iPhone owner wrote to me.
Click to expand...

First world problems much? :lol: Man some people really lost touch with reality.
 
In chronological order...

Invisible / Oscar Loss
Not sure giving away Invisible was smart, but not that important in the realm of things. But I do think the Oscar loss delayed the album, and that was the biggest mistake here. Not having an album ready to go around this momentum. Why be at the Top of the Rock, on the first new Tonight Show and not announce something more than just the single you just gave away.

The Album Release
Say what you want about the Apple deal, it got the album into the hands of people. U2 doesn't need the sales dollars vs what Apple gave them. Did "Free" effect anything here? I don't really think so, other than the "iTunes Auto Download" backlash. People would have forgot about this in no time, if the band had not halted everything. (See below)

CD Release
It's gonna be for hard core fans only! Everyone got it free. The CD has Invisible and other good songs on it? Great because there better be a reason for someone to buy it after you gave it away free. The Physical Release Album Cover? Not a fan, but people don't buy or not buy an album because of a cover (usually), and I point to my first statement. This physical release is really for fans.

Lead Single
I don't think it was a bad first single, but it was what you would guess U2 would release if you had a chance to listen to it ahead of time. (Not what they should release as a 1st, just what they would)

Song Writing Style / Written on acoustic kinda thing...
I think this was exactly the right approach and this is what makes this album great. This is their most consistent album in a long time. I know there are some fans of first half/2nd half, but for me, there is way less skippers on this album than anything since 2000.

Accident
THIS IS THE PROBLEM. Basically, they were on a roll, building up some tour momentum when Bono felt the need to kill himself. At this point, any movement completely stopped (even with the tour announcement) and other than a 6000 word blog post, and a Rolling Stone troubles article, we really haven't seen or heard from them. The 3 of them should be out there in SOME way. The Chris Martin/BS thing was decent, and one or two more of those kinda things, could have gone a ways in keeping people thinking of the band...Personally, the Edge could do the whole promo tour on his own, and I would kill to see a performance like that. Anyways. They should be doing something now to remind people that they will be touring soon...

This can be fixed with a Songs of Experience release in a more tradition fashion (heck, drop it like Beyoncé did, no notice, but a great package, audio/video and SELL it and see what reaction you get) right in the break of the tour (end of 2015?) , then come back and do more dates everywhere.
 
"Personally, the Edge could do the whole promo tour on his own, and I would kill to see a performance like that."

The Edge's acoustic cooking tour! :hyper:

I did enjoyed his Running to Eat Mussels mix.
 
The only problem with SOI is this:

NOT ENOUGH GUITAR!

The playing is tasteful, but where's the fire? The creativity? I listened to this after Achtung and it doesn't even seem like it's the same guy playing lead guitar. If you said Edge was one of the best guitarists ever and played SOI as an introduction you'd get laughed at.
 
Hollow Island said:
The only problem with SOI is this:

NOT ENOUGH Cowbell!

The playing is tasteful, but where's the fire? The creativity? I listened to this after Achtung and it doesn't even seem like it's the same guy playing lead Cowbell. If you said Edge was one of the best Cowbell players ever and played SOI as an introduction you'd get laughed at.
Click to expand...


Fixed


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
yeah, it's the worst choice for a single on the whole album. any other song would have made more sense. it's not catchy, though it does sound a bit "new" I guess. When I heard it I thought, "oh god, more basic rock music. the worst thing u2 does..."
 
Ah yes, the #1 reason among U2 fans that the public didn't see the genius of a U2 record the way they did...the bad first single. If only MOFO Magnificent The Crystal Ballroom had been the first single than Pop NLOTH Songs of Innocence would have been a huge, unqualified success.

This is so much double speak...lauding how "successful" SOI was because so many millions of people got to hear it, and then on the other hand lament how much it failed because no one got to hear the REALLY great songs on it because of a bad first single. Crikey the contortions people come up with to avoid the simple truth that the general public just doesn't always connect to U2's music the way the hardcore fan base does.

And Miracle is a pretty damn good song, BTW. Choosing another single would have made zero difference in the fortunes of SOI. Everyone who wanted to listened to that record. A bad single is the last thing you can blame whatever "went wrong" with SOI on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Reflecting on Year post-2000 albums
2 3
Replies
68
Views
7K
MrPryck2U
MrPryck2U
LemonMelon
Desert Island XI - QUARANTINE ISLAND - Group 2 Listening Thread
4 5 6
Replies
175
Views
6K
namkcuR
N
dan_smee
The Best of the Innocence and Experience Era
2
Replies
49
Views
4K
kabigon
K
jphelmet
I+E vs JT vs E+I Which Tour is Best?
2
Replies
39
Views
7K
Martinski
M
LuckyNumber7
U2 Catalog: Take the Survey!
3 4 5
Replies
146
Views
10K
LuckyNumber7
LuckyNumber7

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom