smileplease1974
The Fly
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2003
- Messages
- 30
Greatest Hits compilations are not primarily for hardcore fans but 'floating' fans who may buy the odd album or two, hence the reason why they are usually released before Christmas. I'm not saying that's right or wrong, but it's a fact.
Bearing that in mind, as good as the 1990-2000 compilation was, I think the song selection was bad with many of the band's hit singles from the period left off for tunes that (although great in their own right) are not familiar enough to these floating fans.
It seemed strange to me that the band chose to put tracks such as Gone, Until The End of The World, The First Time, Numb, Electrical Storm and The Hands That Built America onto their 'Greatest Hits', when none of them were hits in the major music charts (apart from Electrical Storm of course which was popular in Europe, but released obviously to promote the album. And in the case of Hands, this tune was bolted onto the end of a film just at the moment when everyone is leaving the cinema.).
Quite why they left off Elevation, Walk On, Last Night On Earth, Please, Who's Gonna Ride..., If God Will Send, Lemon and in the US, The Fly, when they all charted relatively well (and thus will have a recognisable factor about them) is beyond me. And the B-side selection is strange as well with many of the band's finest B-side moments (Summer Rain, Holy Joe, Two Shots of Happy and Slow Dancing) left off for several relatively weak remixes.
I can understand the band's reasons for choosing the tracks that they did, but greatest hits compilations are exactly that, the greatest hits, not a selection of personal favourites. I know lots of people who would have bought the album but didn't because they didn't know that many of the tunes.
There was (here in the UK anyway) a fair amount of negative publicity around the album stating that the tracks were from the band's weakest decade. I think that's unfair and wrong. But the fact that the band re-recorded many of the tracks giving them a more traditional sound (and undermining everything that their experimental adventures stood for during the 90s) completely devalued the original recordings, the albums in which they came from, the Greatest Hits compilation itself and enhanced the negative publicity. If Achtung Baby was the sound of four men chopping down the Joshua tree, then Greatest Hits 1990-2000 was the sound of four men rebuilding it.
U2 are still one of the biggest bands in the world, have no doubt about that. I love their music dearly, but that doesn't mean that we can't be crticial of them when we feel it's due.
The sales figures for the greatest hits are relatively low because of the album's content. It could have and should have been better, charted better and sold better.
Bearing that in mind, as good as the 1990-2000 compilation was, I think the song selection was bad with many of the band's hit singles from the period left off for tunes that (although great in their own right) are not familiar enough to these floating fans.
It seemed strange to me that the band chose to put tracks such as Gone, Until The End of The World, The First Time, Numb, Electrical Storm and The Hands That Built America onto their 'Greatest Hits', when none of them were hits in the major music charts (apart from Electrical Storm of course which was popular in Europe, but released obviously to promote the album. And in the case of Hands, this tune was bolted onto the end of a film just at the moment when everyone is leaving the cinema.).
Quite why they left off Elevation, Walk On, Last Night On Earth, Please, Who's Gonna Ride..., If God Will Send, Lemon and in the US, The Fly, when they all charted relatively well (and thus will have a recognisable factor about them) is beyond me. And the B-side selection is strange as well with many of the band's finest B-side moments (Summer Rain, Holy Joe, Two Shots of Happy and Slow Dancing) left off for several relatively weak remixes.
I can understand the band's reasons for choosing the tracks that they did, but greatest hits compilations are exactly that, the greatest hits, not a selection of personal favourites. I know lots of people who would have bought the album but didn't because they didn't know that many of the tunes.
There was (here in the UK anyway) a fair amount of negative publicity around the album stating that the tracks were from the band's weakest decade. I think that's unfair and wrong. But the fact that the band re-recorded many of the tracks giving them a more traditional sound (and undermining everything that their experimental adventures stood for during the 90s) completely devalued the original recordings, the albums in which they came from, the Greatest Hits compilation itself and enhanced the negative publicity. If Achtung Baby was the sound of four men chopping down the Joshua tree, then Greatest Hits 1990-2000 was the sound of four men rebuilding it.
U2 are still one of the biggest bands in the world, have no doubt about that. I love their music dearly, but that doesn't mean that we can't be crticial of them when we feel it's due.
The sales figures for the greatest hits are relatively low because of the album's content. It could have and should have been better, charted better and sold better.
Thankfully this forum does not have a big growth of threads.
