Speculation thread: predict U2's next era

[U2girl]

We had the personal/religious/political first three albums, then fascination with America in lyrics and sound and U2's rise to superstars. Then more introverted lyrics and more European/dance sounds. This past decade had U2 as the elder statesmen of the game, first re-inventing themselves as a pop-music band, a retro band and a band trying to bring their sound in the future. History seems to suggest a new decade means a new sound for U2...

So, for a lack of a better word, we're (and certainly I hope U2 are) "ready for what's next" with U2 currently juggling 4 projects: a club album, a rock album, Spiderman soundtrack and SOA with possible hints already heard on the tour: Glastonbury and possibly Mercy from the "rock" album, EBW and North Star (and Soon) from SOA and the Spiderman song they played.

What do you predict ? U2 focusing on more guitar-driven music in the next phase, something more atmospheric, U2 once more trying a new sound for themselves (perhaps working with a hip hop producer for that "club" album?) or U2 content with continuing to work with the familiar trinity of Eno/Lanois/Lillywhite ?

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

whatever they think will sell the most records.

 

[Niceman]

Since the tour is more important that the albums at this stage, I don't see how they get to move on from the elder-statesman phase.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

agreed.

i think u2 want to go the more obscure, atmospheric, experimental rock route... but they can't commit to it because there's a big faction in the group (including mcguinness) who fear that going full out balls to the wall in that way is too big a risk. thus how we got no line, an album that has tremendous highs but doesn't really know what it wants to be.

i think the poor reception of no line in comparison with the last two albums will lead them to go back to a traditional u2 by numbers approach, and the internal debate around which way to go is why there's no chance we'll get a new album this year.

 

[U2girl]

Since the tour is more important that the albums at this stage, I don't see how they get to move on from the elder-statesman phase.

For the most part, NLOTH seems to be an indication. Less "11 singles", more "album" approach.

The problem was, as Edge put it, "getting lost in the music" and not picking out one cohesive sound. (and not really having a single but that's an old topic) And I'm still convinced the people producing the last two albums are the reason why they sound low on new ideas. Hats off to Eno and Lanois, but NLOTH isn't even close to UF or AB or even ATYCLB in reinvention.

Also consider this is the end of another trinity of albums for U2 - I'd think a (relatively) poor reception (read: indifference from the world as opposed to the very positive reaction to the other two 00's U2 albums) of NLOTH would be, similar to Rattle and Hum and Pop, another push for something new.

 

[theedgeu2]

Death Core Metal!!!

Nah but really I think they're going to do something new. Like they did with AB and ATYCLB. Who knows what it will be and what it'll sound like but I honestly can't wait to see what U2 conjures up next. I really hope we don't get another ATYCLB, straight forward rock album. I'm more for something experimental but unfortunately at this time I don't think that's gonna happen.

 

[juliaguliaxo94]

Death Core Metal!!!

 

[Airseven]

Unfortunately, with age, complacency, and added personal responsibilities, I think they'll churn out a few more insignificant pop albums and fade away. Realistically, they can't be expected to match their younger selves at the peak of creativity. Expecting another Achtung Baby is wishful thinking. The early 90s alt revolution created the atmosphere for that. It's far gone now.

 

[medley]

Great idea for a thread. A next era can mean a lot of new approaches: possibly a new kind of sound, a new kind of albums (concept albums?), a new kind of marketing strategy, tour, clips, etc. and after the not so good reception of NLOTH it's certainly time for a big change.

i think u2 want to go the more obscure, atmospheric, experimental rock route... but they can't commit to it because there's a big faction in the group (including mcguinness) who fear that going full out balls to the wall in that way is too big a risk. thus how we got no line, an album that has tremendous highs but doesn't really know what it wants to be.

If there is something that this band knows better than any other that's that reinventing themselves is the best way to stay relevant both in terms of sales and artistic credibility. Releasing a "safe" album would be a really bad commercial move. Why do you think most bands can't last as long as U2 has been able to? The trilogy thing is not a nice coincidence: they know that you can't use the same formula forever if you want to stay on top. Of course such a change has also to coincide with the will to make something different.

 

[medley]

For example the fact that they are playing unreleased songs live is a totally new approach. Concept albums of only meditative songs (SOA), loud rockers and Club songs could be another one. ROTSG is also really interesting, this could be a new kind of sound for U2 (Right now the "Club" album is the one that seems the most interesting to me).

There are already evidences that some changes can be expected.

 

[GirlsAloudFan]

They've already done it all, really. And they're old.

At this point, I wouldn't be surprised at all if they go with the "just write some good songs" approach. And, honestly, I wouldn't mind it either.

Fuck a half-baked concept album about God talking to you through your MacBook or Palestinian motorcycle cops or whatever the fuck that last one was about.

 

[65980]

I'm all right with U2's trying to be big and remain relevant on the pop charts, etc. What I'm not all right with is their willingness to sacrifice artisitic/musical integrity to get there. Since the end of 'underground' music touching the mainstream in the mid-90s, U2 has foundered conceptually, even while writing plenty of great songs. Unfortunately for me (and I think, for their future legacy), several of those fine songs have been surrounded by so much corporate pomp and circumstance as to render them negligible by-products of the U2 entertaiment industry. (It would also help if Bono didn't strut, pose, and try to act like he's 18 on stage when he's 50.)

So, I'm not sure if they have a new direction or need one. It seems to me that, perhaps for the first time, they are now at a stage where nobody knows in what direction they should be going.

 

[65980]

Since the tour is more important that the albums at this stage...

This is an interesting comment. I am curious about what exactly you mean here?

 

[nirniva]

Fuck a half-baked concept album about God talking to you through your MacBook or Palestinian motorcycle cops or whatever the fuck that last one was about.

Also, this is a good idea for a thread. Personally, I hope they stay true to the original concept for SOA, but, since I've been pretty happy with all the new songs they've played, I guess I'd be okay with anything (except for another ATYCLB/HTDAAB - I actually quite like both those albums, but it's been done and it's time to move on.) From the looks of things, this could be the first U2 era we can't easily classify...

 

[Screwtape2]

I think we will get two more albums at best, one a few years from now and if we are lucky one before the end of the current tour.

An album during the tour would likely be an awkward mix of songs without a cohesive sound. Put simply a continuation of the last two albums structurally.

Assuming we get that album, I suspect an album a few years from now would be another "back to the basics" album like ATYCLB but with the awkward tracklisting of Bomb and NLOTH. They will likely be trying for another commercial album, start thinking of their legacy a lot more and be thinking of less colorful arena tour. Expect their attempt at a Let It Be with Rubin's songs returning.

If we do not get an album before 360 ends then expect Bomb part 2 aka an odd tracklist of rockers, slow songs, commercial singles and worked to death songs. With the expectations and legacy on the mind it would be likely that they chase sales and Grammy's aggressively again.

 

[Aygo]

More atmospheric, less atmospheric... I think the "eras" idea is over. From now on U2 will release what'll be more comercially viable and they'll follow the "consolidation act" started in 2000, like all the other dinossaur artists. Maybe an album or two with a few songs a little more out of the "in your face" thing, but most of all, we'll get U2 by the numbers.

Plus, after NLOTH's failure (in their opinion), they'll get back (forever) to the same old thing again.

 

[The_acrobat]

I imagine this current era will give us another album (be it this fall, next fall, or sometime in between). After that, I expect another album/tour mid decade, 2015-2016. This tour will be less of a deal than 360. Then I expect a big grand finale album/tour at the end of the decade. U2's contract with livenation expires in 2020. That'd put their career at a nice/neat 40 years, and putting the band members at 60 years old.

 

[BVS]

A very reliable source has told me that U2 are talking about a death metal hip hop album.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Great idea for a thread. A next era can mean a lot of new approaches: possibly a new kind of sound, a new kind of albums (concept albums?), a new kind of marketing strategy, tour, clips, etc. and after the not so good reception of NLOTH it's certainly time for a big change.


If there is something that this band knows better than any other that's that reinventing themselves is the best way to stay relevant both in terms of sales and artistic credibility. Releasing a "safe" album would be a really bad commercial move. Why do you think most bands can't last as long as U2 has been able to? The trilogy thing is not a nice coincidence: they know that you can't use the same formula forever if you want to stay on top. Of course such a change has also to coincide with the will to make something different.

yea well... what if their ability to "stay on top" is finally over?

honestly... no band has stayed on top for this long. we're in uncharted territory. eventually it won't be cool and hip for the kids to be fans of 50 year olds in leather, right?

it's happened to every other band...

 

[nirniva]

A very reliable source has told me that U2 are talking about a death metal hip hop album.

My mental image of "death metal hip-hop" is something like the Beastie Boys crossed with Megadeth...which is both hilarious and somewhat disturbing.

 

[medley]

yea well... what if their ability to "stay on top" is finally over?

honestly... no band has stayed on top for this long. we're in uncharted territory. eventually it won't be cool and hip for the kids to be fans of 50 year olds in leather, right?

it's happened to every other band...

Perhaps they will fail this time but like you say no band has stayed on top that long so they certainly know better than any other what they have to do now. And in the past what they did in this kind of situations was to try new things and basically that’s what U2 is all about. Doing such a move is certainly not easy and a given it will be a commercial success but trying to do another 00s album would be a sure way to discredit themselves both commercially and artistically imo because the sales of NLOTH show that this formula is really getting old now. So it’s not like they have another choice really. Otherwise it could be perhaps time to retire but I still don’t see that happening. Bono always says that he feels like he's just starting his career and I also don't think there is any fate: they are talented and clever so if they still want to challenge themselves it is certainly possible for them to surprise us one more time.

Trying to challenge themselves is certainly what really matters and the only reason why they still care about commercial success. Do some of you really think that being in the charts is more important for them than doing really what they want to do? Like it or not what they did in the 00s was certainly the kind of songs they wanted to do because they have no other reason to continue making music. Trying another formula also must first come from a will to change not from some kind of big marketing strategy of course but after three albums with the same approach and what we know about their new projects it seems that from a commercial and artistic standpoint the best move is to try something new.

 

[djerdap]

Fuck a half-baked concept album about God talking to you through your MacBook or Palestinian motorcycle cops or whatever the fuck that last one was about.

This just might be the most accurate description of the interesting, albeit confusing mess that is No Line on the Horizon.

 

[65980]

This just might be the most accurate description of the interesting, albeit confusing mess that No Line on the Horizon was.

It was a bit harsh, but I sort of agree with that, too. I think "Cedars of Lebanon" is absolutely brilliant, and "Magnificent" is great (if a bit U2-by-numbers), but the rest of the album is sort-of irrelevant. Not bad, but irrelevant.

Whatever direction they go in, I think, at their age, it's senseless to try covering all bases. In other words, stop trying to have the vagely arty song, the radio uptempo hit, the radio ballad, the classic rock song with cheesy riff, the etc. etc... Just lock into one groove for a few months and ride it out into an LP-length recording and then release it.

 

[U2girl]

It seems to me that, perhaps for the first time, they are now at a stage where nobody knows in what direction they should be going.

That sounds a lot like U2 at the end of Lovetown. Or Popmart.

 

[BVS]

I'm suprised by how many of you are always harping on how U2 are stuck in the old business model, yet so many of you all are stuck in the album format.

The album is dead, it has been for awhile.

 

[LemonMelon]

I'm suprised by how many of you are always harping on how U2 are stuck in the old business model, yet so many of you all are stuck in the album format.

The album is dead, it has been for awhile.

U2 is awful at singles now though. Releasing them, recording them; the works. If they don't get back to the art of making coherent, memorable LPs, I can't imagine what else they could do. I suppose had U2 released the first 4 tracks on NLOTH + Breathe as an EP, they would have gotten less shit, so I suppose that is an option.

The fact is, U2 has ALWAYS been an album band with a penchant for concepts and running themes, and I can't imagine them severing those.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

i think u2 should write the album they want to write. to fuck with what the rest of us think. that's when they'll write their last masterpiece... when they don't worry about how it will be received and just write.

 

[corianderstem]

I'd love that, too.

Now, we just need U2 to think that way.

 

[U2girl]

yea well... what if their ability to "stay on top" is finally over?

honestly... no band has stayed on top for this long. we're in uncharted territory. eventually it won't be cool and hip for the kids to be fans of 50 year olds in leather, right?

We're about to find out soon enough...

 

[U2girl]

i think u2 should write the album they want to write. to fuck with what the rest of us think.

That is not how they have been functioning during their career, is it ?