Whats your thoughts on this???

[Axver]

Originally posted by bram
I think Axver was just referring to the fact that Eno and Lanois normally contribute music to the process. So it's nothing new...but maybe just a little bit more from the Eno and Lanois end, hence the obligatory song-writing credits.

He was not referring to the album as a "normal-sounding" U2 album--at least that's the way it reads to me.

Exactly. Glad someone gets it. This really doesn't revolutionise U2's process of creating an album. The sonic result may be different - after all, JT, Achtung, and ATYCLB don't sound the same - but this is hardly an outside-the-square kind of development.

And LemonMelon, no need to be patronising. I know exactly the role of producers, and I also know that U2 and Eno/Lanois do not have the standard band-producer relationship.

[namkcuR]

The production certainly can't get any worse than Lillywhite's overbaked, burnt(if you will), suffocatingly in-your-face production on Bomb.

[U2DMfan]

Originally posted by Earnie Shavers
How often do you read a story from the studio and it's Eno figuring out a line, Eno in there early finishing off an idea for a bridge, Eno coming up with the keyboard part that ties something together blah blah. If it's just about the formal recognition he most likely fully deserves, nothing will really change. But they are making quite a point of it - which I do think means something a little more exciting.

Absolutely. That's the exact thought I had, if Eno is given more licence to sort of mold the sound rather than merely guide it (if that makes any sense) than it has to be a positive and very exciting.

Besides those things, I think Eno would likely be the finest musician in the room in terms of dialing up something a little out of left field (for U2). I get the impression that he could do something like odd time sigs standing on his head and he could really be the actual influence of those "polyrhythms". A 6/4 shaker or tambourine playing over a straight 4/4 conga from Mullen.

That said, I expect a pretty organic approach. So Lanois and Edge should have a big influence as well. I think the band could be saying "fuck off" to drum machines and trying to come up with those beats and rhythms on their own. Larry is probably trying to push himself more, Adam I think could be a wild-card and really try something new. Dream out loud, right?

Originally posted by namkcuR
The production certainly can't get any worse than Lillywhite's overbaked, burnt(if you will), suffocatingly in-your-face production on Bomb.

Yeah, I don't want to beat a dead horse but I listened to 5 or 6 tracks from HTDAAB a week or two ago for the first time in ages and that was the exact impression I was left with.

I wasn't thinking about Bono's vocals, lyrics or missed opportunities or any of that, I was left thinking "boy, this sounds like shit" , the production that is. Awful.

[U2girl]

It will easily be better than anything Flood did with Pop, too. I'm surprised he's still allowed near U2 albums.

As for the above, we don't know how much Eno and Lanois really do since we don't get studio input. I could see Eno throwing some ideas and starting points but from what I read Lanois is the one in the trenches with the band, spending more time in studio so who's to get more credit ?
It's not like they don't always state "keyboards: Brian Eno" or "additional guitar: Daniel Lanois", they certainly acknowledge their help with the albums in interviews etc.

[guill]

Originally posted by U2girl
I wonder what that means for a) songwriting credits on the album and money issues and b) live performances.

and c) who has the final cut privilege now ?

[Dorian Gray]

Originally posted by U2DMfan
Absolutely. That's the exact thought I had, if Eno is given more licence to sort of mold the sound rather than merely guide it (if that makes any sense) than it has to be a positive and very exciting.

it wasn't very positive for Passengers...
thankfully, Lanois will be there this time around.

[U2girl]

[U2DMfan]

Originally posted by Dorian Gray


it wasn't very positive for Passengers...
thankfully, Lanois will be there this time around.

Why not mention Zooropa? You know, an actual U2 album where U2 were still interested in sounding a bit like U2.

Shall we count the ways in which Passengers is nothing like an actual U2 album, even Pop?

Anyhow, Lanois is the vanilla in this equation.
He's fine, in fact he's pretty great but he adds less to their sound than Eno. If you need evidence, just put on any album they've made with the both of them.

Could U2 have made anything like Passengers with Danny Lanois that would have sounded anything other than exactly like U2? I think it's pretty obvious who adds more to the equation.

That said, I like Daniel Lanois just fine, I just don't agree that he adds more to their sound than Eno.

[Earnie Shavers]

Originally posted by Dorian Gray

it wasn't very positive for Passengers...
thankfully, Lanois will be there this time around.

As an aside, (because I know people are talking now about the actual music on it) I think Passengers is better produced/mixed than at least 9 of the 11 standard U2 albums.

On the music: It was never intended to sound like a standard U2 album, which makes up a good 50% of the logic behind not calling it a U2 album. Obviously the boundaries would be brought in much closer should it be for a standard U2 album, and in the 00s, no matter what you are hearing from Bono about new this/experiment that, I still think those boundaries will be very, VERY close in. Fear not Passenger haters. Remember Eno takes a decent chunk of the credit for what you probably describe as and yearn for in 'classic' U2 all the time. If anything, his influence hopefully will be mostly in forcing them to give the songs a bit of room and space. If that is all he does, just brings back some delicacy and musicianship to U2's music, then he deserves double whatever they're paying him.

[david]

I'm all for a more commercial Passengers.

[Earnie Shavers]

Originally posted by david
I'm all for a more commercial Passengers.

Would sound, I think, a lot like Stateless/Ground Beneath. Diffferent being a good 8 years later, but similar in it's place between tuneful but musicaly focused - if you know what I mean. Traditionally structured, but without the !!!U2!!! gusto.

[U2girl]

Originally posted by U2DMfan


Could U2 have made anything like Passengers with Danny Lanois that would have sounded anything other than exactly like U2? I think it's pretty obvious who adds more to the equation.

They made AB with Lanois alone originally, and he is still credited for producing 5 songs on the album. That didn't sound like U2 at the time either.

[U2DMfan]

Originally posted by U2girl


They made AB with Lanois alone originally, and he is still credited for producing 5 songs on the album. That didn't sound like U2 at the time either.

Which of those 5 songs didn't need Eno's help to become someting other than standard U2 fare?

I mean, I hear 'salome' and 'where did it all go wrong' and almost laugh at how pedestrian those songs are, good but basic and bland.

Is that the fruits of what Lanois brought to bringing U2 out of their shell?

I'm curious, honestly.

[U2girl]

Apparently none did since all 5 songs are credited "produced by Daniel Lanois" (and that includes such U2 standard songs like The Fly and Zoo station). There is a thank you to Eno on The Fly but are we to think his keyboards made all the difference ?

I think Lanois gets downplayed in this forum and they need both of them to shine. I mean, Zooropa and Passengers vs UF/JT/AB/ATYCLB. Interesting comments on UF from McGuiness in that recent interview.