Clayton Hints of New Direction on Next Record

[U2Man]

Originally posted by Utoo
That seriously made me laugh out loud! Seeing as how I only got married a few months ago, I think my wife would be pretty upset if I turned into a girl now...

You may have a point there

You just broke my heart, though.

[U2FanPeter]

<<REM, Pearl Jam and Radiohead>>

I think all 3 bands have had a very fractured relationship with the media at one time or another. REM didn't tour on their 2 biggest, back-to-back albums. U2 have always been very media savvy.

Also very interesting, AFAIK, PJ and RH have both graduated from their record contracts and are currently free agents. We'll find within a year if they have any ambitious plans.

u2fp

[roy]

Originally posted by U2girl


Ironic though, the "alternative" U2 of the 90s had bigger hits than the "pop" U2 of this decade.

You mean alternative offerings such as WGRYWH, EBTTRT, Discotheque etc

[namkcuR]

The 90s wasn't the only time when U2 were 'Alternative'. They were alternative from 1983 all the way through the 90s. You hear Alternative, you think of 90s alternative rock, but in the 80s there was Alternative too, and it was populated by the likes of The Cure, Depeche Mode, The Police, et al. And U2.

NYD, TUF, Bad, Streets, WOWY, Bullet, etc, all alternative.

[Zoots]

Originally posted by namkcuR
The 90s wasn't the only time when U2 were 'Alternative'. They were alternative from 1983 all the way through the 90s. You hear Alternative, you think of 90s alternative rock, but in the 80s there was Alternative too, and it was populated by the likes of The Cure, Depeche Mode, The Police, et al. And U2.

NYD, TUF, Bad, Streets, WOWY, Bullet, etc, all alternative.

UToo and U2Man sittin' in the tree.......

[Murray]

Originally posted by U2girl
Ironic though, the "alternative" U2 of the 90s had bigger hits than the "pop" U2 of this decade.

Wow....I never really thought of that...but you are right!

U2 have had bigger hits when trying to create something new and experimental, rather than trying to recreate past hits,
which is probably why WTSHNN was a hit but COBL was not.

I guess I am not the only one that wants to hear U2 be experimental again - the entire country does!

[Meghan]

World.

[U2girl]

Originally posted by namkcuR
The 90s wasn't the only time when U2 were 'Alternative'. They were alternative from 1983 all the way through the 90s. You hear Alternative, you think of 90s alternative rock, but in the 80s there was Alternative too, and it was populated by the likes of The Cure, Depeche Mode, The Police, et al. And U2.

NYD, TUF, Bad, Streets, WOWY, Bullet, etc, all alternative.

U2 stopped being alternative when they moved on from playing clubs, to playing arenas, to playing stadiums, increasing album sales and getting more and more radio and MTV airplay.

[U2girl]

Originally posted by roy




You mean alternative offerings such as WGRYWH, EBTTRT, Discotheque etc

Or One and Mysterious ways, Stay and Staring at the sun, If god will send his angels and Last night on earth.

[Tyagu_Anaykus]

what the?
Isn't this forum about this:
"Clayton Hints of New Direction on Next Record"

thats why i like this forum. Every time we start a thread about something, that something becomes something else.

[namkcuR]

Originally posted by U2girl


U2 stopped being alternative when they moved on from playing clubs, to playing arenas, to playing stadiums, increasing album sales and getting more and more radio and MTV airplay.

No. Your are incorrect. Do you even know what alternative means? It is NOT synonomous with 'Indie'. 'Indie' is what you just described. 'Alternative' is a sub-mainstream style.

[U2girl]

They've been part of the mainstream since 1987.

[namkcuR]

Originally posted by U2girl
They've been part of the mainstream since 1987.

You still don't get it.

Sub-mainstream would be a layer OF the mainstream. An Alternative band can still be in the mainstream. It's not one or the other. Non-alternative rock would be Aerosmith, Rolling Stones, Led Zeppelin, Metallica, Kiss, Guns'N'Roses, et al. Alternative rock would be The Cure, U2, Depeche Mode, Radiohead, Joy Division, Red Hot Chili Peppers, R.E.M., Pink Floyd, Oasis, Coldplay, The Verve, et al. Different styles, but both can be and are mainstream.

[U2girl]

The Cure, U2, Depeche Mode, Radiohead, Joy Division, Red Hot Chili Peppers, R.E.M., Pink Floyd, Oasis, Coldplay, The Verve, et al

We will have to agree to disagree. I can't see how you can say U2 (two or three other bands on that list I also wouldn't label as as alternative) has anything in common music- and the beloved word here - attiitude-wise to the above bands.

[namkcuR]

Originally posted by U2girl
The Cure, U2, Depeche Mode, Radiohead, Joy Division, Red Hot Chili Peppers, R.E.M., Pink Floyd, Oasis, Coldplay, The Verve, et al

We will have to agree to disagree. I can't see how you can say U2 (two or three other bands on that list I also wouldn't label as as alternative) has anything in common music- and the beloved word here - attiitude-wise to the above bands.

We will have to disagree then.

[bsp77]

Originally posted by U2girl
We will have to agree to disagree.

Technically speaking, namkcuR is correct. Alternative is just a style of music that U2 is a part of. Alternative is pretty much the new mainstream when it comes to rock.

[Layton]

Originally posted by Tyagu_Anaykus
what the?
Isn't this forum about this:
"Clayton Hints of New Direction on Next Record"

thats why i like this forum. Every time we start a thread about something, that something becomes something else.

I'll take the blame for this firestorm. I started it with the 2 zoo's (rang and esque). Now, I gotta go back and figure out what they had to say.

[Layton]

Originally posted by Zootlesque

If I were them I would be happy with my glorious past and stick to do what I do best... pushing the envelope, making new and interesting music and not giving a fuck whether it will sell or if I'll continue to be the biggest band in the world.


Why does HTDAAB have a friendly sound?
Listen to Passengers, Pop, Radiohead's Kid A, Amnesiac, Pearl Jam's Vitalogy etc.. and then listen to ATYCLB and HTDAAB. Isn't it obvious which one is more radio friendly/easy to get into... and which ones make you go at first, but then as you listen more, you see the amount of work that has gone into it!

There are 2 schools of thought regarding making great Rock music or great art, for that matter, the way I see it. One is what you describe as not giving a fuck about sales or not. The other is creating work that is easily digestable for the purpose of finding a way into an observers soul, for lack of better words. Why is one better than the other?

What you call radio-friendly is really the use of pop ideas to facillitate the easy-to-digest aspect of HTDAAB's art. These ideas are a creative means to an end. Why use this brand of creativity, you ask? Well, it's because HTDAAB is an amazingly ambitious album. It adheres to the old school philosophy of music as inspiration. The fuck it all philosophy you like so much doesn't have room for that idea.

U2 are as grand as they come. HTDAAB is an attempt to create art for the mightiest inspirational purposes. The key to whether or not it works is whether the thematic content really delivers (Remember, it's POSSIBLE that pop ideas can be subversive). In other words, does the album lure people in and succeed in becoming a guide for the initiated to lean on as they journey through today's world? That's how HTDAAB should be evaluated.

Money hungry, too safe, radio friendly, those are just cliches that noisemakers rely on. Here at Interference, we bring the noise not just make noise----LOL. That's why I asked all the questions. Thanks for answering them.

[Zoots]

Originally posted by Layton

Well, it's because HTDAAB is an amazingly ambitious album. It adheres to the old school philosophy of music as inspiration. The fuck it all philosophy you like so much doesn't have room for that idea.

Who said I am not for the 'music as inspiration' philosophy??? If I only liked the 'fuck it all' philosophy as you so put it, I would only like the 90s output... Achtung thru Pop... nothing before and nothing after. But I love all the inspirational stuff they did from Boy to Rattle as well as all the crazy shit they did from Achtung thru Pop! It's the post Pop stuff that feels a tad derivative and just plain.. not as good! It's no doubt ambitious, I'm not denying that! There are few songs in U2's career that sound as ambitious as Miracle Drug. Doesn't mean that some of these songs couldn't have turned out better, had they not sat on them for 4 years, changed the lyrics and produced the shit out of them! ATYCLB would have turned out so much better and more inspirational with songs like Ground Beneath, Levitate, Stateless and Summer Rain instead of the mediocre IALW & Wild Honey, the amateur rhymes of Grace (I do like the melody) or the over-produced Stuck! And compare the lyrics of ABOY (album ver) w/ ABOY (alt.). The latter is sooooo much better IMO. It's not like they don't still have it in them. It just seems like they're paranoid or something about how these songs would be received and they end up eventually making a mess out of them. More often than not, I think, ideas are best when they're born... like a creative burst or explosion which... after much analysis and 'too many cooks' treatment, loses it's flavor.

[the tourist]

I don't think U2 is alternative at all. U2 is Pop. Just like the title of the album. Then again, I don't think alternative is necessarily a style of music. Other words someone could have come up with of "different than the main style of music you hear on the radio" are: Unconventional; Substitute; Avant Garde; Eccentric. Alternative isn't a description of the sound. It's a description of a fact. Although I couldn't call U2 alternative with songs such as With Or Without You, Mysterious Ways, New Year's Day, Pride, I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For, Where The Streets Have No Name, Beautiful Day, and other pop songs that show up on the radio quite frequently. "Alternative", as stupidly factual a description it is (which from now on I'll call "Unconventional"), would probably be things like new Pearl Jam that don't get much radio play. New Oasis (old Oasis is pop, unless you consider "britPOP" to be alternative, or better, unconventional) is "alternative". I think subcategories are stupid anyway. But subcategories that try to become their own category entirely, where two bands can sound 100% differently and be classified under the same category (ie, I've heard Jars Of Clay, Bjork, Radiohead, and Velvet Revolver all classified as "alternative"), is just completely silly. U2 is pop.