EPandAmerica
New Yorker
U2girl said:
Exactly!
All I know is that to MY ears U2 at their worst is still so much
better than anybody else out there hands down.
Did U2 take it too far?
- Thread starter One Tree Still
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Exactly!
All I know is that to MY ears U2 at their worst is still so much
better than anybody else out there hands down.
doctorwho
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
All those high school kids who have ZERO interest in U2 will be fighting for tickets once the "hot new tour" comes to town. U2 will be the "in thing" and I can guarantee you attitudes will change.
U2 are in their 40's - sorry to be ageist, but the fact is, 40+ year old men don't grab the attention of the teen market that quickly. In contrast, in 1987, U2 were in their 20's and could easily capture the teen market.
Given that U2 aren't going to capture the teen market just by "showing up", they are forced to do massive publicity. They also have to do monstrous publicity just to compete with all the other top-selling artists who seemed to have sold their collective souls for a few more sales (Spears and Pepsi, Madonna and Pepsi, Kravitz and the Gap, etc.). Given the monstrous sales in week 1 of HTDAAB, it seems to have worked. The good thing, though, is that U2 didn't sell their souls to get noticed. They simply gave free concerts, collaborated with an innovative way of distributing music, and performed on TV. There are no commercial endorsements of a new VISA card here.
Sure, maybe a good chunk of U2's fans are older. This is to be expected. In 20 years, do you think Justin Timberlake or Britney Spears will capture a teen market? Do you think Linkin Park or Coldplay will? Just like the Stones, U2 have fans across all age groups, with many above the age of 30. Nothing wrong with that - in fact, if I were an artist, I'd prefer it. Teens are fickle. They go with whatever is hot at the moment. In contrast, appeal to the older set and you have a fan for life.
As for the music - I admit, barring a few exceptions ("Stuck...", "Wild Honey", "Fast Cars", "Love & Peace..."), the music isn't that ground-breaking on the past 2 albums. But then, does it have to be?
U2 have altered directions several times. How many other artists can say that? And the last two albums are yet another alteration. The last two albums are a reflection back upon ALL of U2's career, yet modernized for today's world. They are making fresh, lively songs, by exploring what made U2 sound like U2. This isn't "With or Without You - Part 2". This isn't "Mysterious Ways - Part 2". These are fresh ideas written by men who have clearly lived and seen a lot. These songs couldn't have been created by the 20-something or 30-something U2.
But perhaps this sound isn't innovative enough for you. Perhaps the songs don't capture you as they once did. So be it. No one can force you to like anything.
However, before abandoning U2 completely, please take a good look at the rest of the music out there. Glance at the Billboard charts - how many songs can you hum in the Top 50? How many albums have you bought in the Top 100? U2 have contemporaries with Coldplay, Radiohead, etc., but many other artists simply don't sell the way U2 does. You may even enjoy those other artists more - and please, enjoy them! But you have to give credit to U2 for being one of the few artists who've been around for 25 years and can still produce #1 albums and Top 40 hits, while still sounding fresh. "Vertigo" is a great example of that freshness and I, for one, am very glad U2 is still here to offer something to help break up the monotony of R&B and rap that's dominating the charts.
Bottom line: U2, to my ears, is still producing fresh sounds. They may not be earth-shaking in their diversity, but the sounds are still unique and fresh. Bono's voice and, more importantly, his passion are alive and stronger than ever. U2 still has a message, but instead of preaching like they did in the 80's, these are words coming from men who have now DONE work, not just sang about it. And I can relate and appreciate this infinitely more than a JT-era song.
U2 are in their 40's - sorry to be ageist, but the fact is, 40+ year old men don't grab the attention of the teen market that quickly. In contrast, in 1987, U2 were in their 20's and could easily capture the teen market.
Given that U2 aren't going to capture the teen market just by "showing up", they are forced to do massive publicity. They also have to do monstrous publicity just to compete with all the other top-selling artists who seemed to have sold their collective souls for a few more sales (Spears and Pepsi, Madonna and Pepsi, Kravitz and the Gap, etc.). Given the monstrous sales in week 1 of HTDAAB, it seems to have worked. The good thing, though, is that U2 didn't sell their souls to get noticed. They simply gave free concerts, collaborated with an innovative way of distributing music, and performed on TV. There are no commercial endorsements of a new VISA card here.
Sure, maybe a good chunk of U2's fans are older. This is to be expected. In 20 years, do you think Justin Timberlake or Britney Spears will capture a teen market? Do you think Linkin Park or Coldplay will? Just like the Stones, U2 have fans across all age groups, with many above the age of 30. Nothing wrong with that - in fact, if I were an artist, I'd prefer it. Teens are fickle. They go with whatever is hot at the moment. In contrast, appeal to the older set and you have a fan for life.
As for the music - I admit, barring a few exceptions ("Stuck...", "Wild Honey", "Fast Cars", "Love & Peace..."), the music isn't that ground-breaking on the past 2 albums. But then, does it have to be?
U2 have altered directions several times. How many other artists can say that? And the last two albums are yet another alteration. The last two albums are a reflection back upon ALL of U2's career, yet modernized for today's world. They are making fresh, lively songs, by exploring what made U2 sound like U2. This isn't "With or Without You - Part 2". This isn't "Mysterious Ways - Part 2". These are fresh ideas written by men who have clearly lived and seen a lot. These songs couldn't have been created by the 20-something or 30-something U2.
But perhaps this sound isn't innovative enough for you. Perhaps the songs don't capture you as they once did. So be it. No one can force you to like anything.
However, before abandoning U2 completely, please take a good look at the rest of the music out there. Glance at the Billboard charts - how many songs can you hum in the Top 50? How many albums have you bought in the Top 100? U2 have contemporaries with Coldplay, Radiohead, etc., but many other artists simply don't sell the way U2 does. You may even enjoy those other artists more - and please, enjoy them! But you have to give credit to U2 for being one of the few artists who've been around for 25 years and can still produce #1 albums and Top 40 hits, while still sounding fresh. "Vertigo" is a great example of that freshness and I, for one, am very glad U2 is still here to offer something to help break up the monotony of R&B and rap that's dominating the charts.
Bottom line: U2, to my ears, is still producing fresh sounds. They may not be earth-shaking in their diversity, but the sounds are still unique and fresh. Bono's voice and, more importantly, his passion are alive and stronger than ever. U2 still has a message, but instead of preaching like they did in the 80's, these are words coming from men who have now DONE work, not just sang about it. And I can relate and appreciate this infinitely more than a JT-era song.
Last edited:
rjhbonovox said:
Great post!I tell you what "I love EVERYTHING u2 have ever done, and come to think of it, EVERYTHING they are ever going to do cos its gonna be great whatever it is, YES it has to be cos it is U2!". Happy now!
Congratulations - you totally misunderstood my post.
I find it hard to believe that you or U2_Guy or ponkine and the likes, with your hate (I don't think any other word describes it) for ATYCLB and HTDAAB, love anything from U2.
Scarletwine
New Yorker
doctorwho!
Always hits the right note on a thread. :clap:
Always hits the right note on a thread. :clap:
financeguy
ONE love, blood, life
Re: Re: Re: Did U2 take it too far?
Very true! Here is an extract from Steve Pond's review of The Joshua Tree, published in Rolling Stone 9/4/87:-
"The band still falls into some old traps: Bono's perpetually choked-up voice can sound overwrought and self-important; some of the images (fire and rain, say) start to lose their resonance after a dozen or so uses; and "Exit", a recited psycodrama about a killer, is awkward enough to remind you that not even Patti Smith could regularly pull of this sort off thing."
Rest of his review was very positive though. But I distinctly remember some pretty lukewarm reviews of Joshua Tree in the British press when it first came out - seems incredible now!
LPU2 said:
Very true! Here is an extract from Steve Pond's review of The Joshua Tree, published in Rolling Stone 9/4/87:-
"The band still falls into some old traps: Bono's perpetually choked-up voice can sound overwrought and self-important; some of the images (fire and rain, say) start to lose their resonance after a dozen or so uses; and "Exit", a recited psycodrama about a killer, is awkward enough to remind you that not even Patti Smith could regularly pull of this sort off thing."
Rest of his review was very positive though. But I distinctly remember some pretty lukewarm reviews of Joshua Tree in the British press when it first came out - seems incredible now!
If you find another band to be more creative and mind blowing then U2 why dont you listen to them instead. Personally I dont think there is any band in the history of music that has explored more genres then U2 have, especially with the success that U2 has had.
U2s base audience hasnt ever really changed in age...I would say the majority of U2 fans ever since Boy have been about 20-35....its never been music that grabs a teens attention till they see the tour live thats why the album always shoots back up the charts once they roll through town.
U2 have explored all the tones and all the colours in music sure there are other great bands out there but in general they only do ONE style and ONE style only successfully.
I know I will be listening to U2 in 10 and 20 years and I am sure the majority of the people here will be as well.
U2s base audience hasnt ever really changed in age...I would say the majority of U2 fans ever since Boy have been about 20-35....its never been music that grabs a teens attention till they see the tour live thats why the album always shoots back up the charts once they roll through town.
U2 have explored all the tones and all the colours in music sure there are other great bands out there but in general they only do ONE style and ONE style only successfully.
I know I will be listening to U2 in 10 and 20 years and I am sure the majority of the people here will be as well.
phanan
Blue Crack Addict
ATYCLB and HTDAAB are certainly not on the same level as JT or AB, but doctorwho is right on. When you see what the biggest albums from this year are, I think most of us can agree that HTDAAB is far superior. I for one am very glad that U2 keep making music...
rjhbonovox
Refugee
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2002
- Messages
- 2,139
U2girl said:
Well believe it cos you wanna ask my family how much I go on about how great U2 have been. They used to say to me "well if U2 released anything you would think it was great". Its just that I am brave enough to face the facts of how good U2's albums are now. If you have been a fan of the band since 1984 like I have you can easily see the change in this band since 1998. Their attitude to the whole thing has changed, up to 1998 they used to have this attitude that if the music sounds good to them then fuc# what other people think cos we(the band) love it. In my opinion they are now making music where their very first thought is "Will it sell millions, and has it got the coke riff?" Well the coke riff is everybloodywhere these days that is for sure!
I love this new album. Listening to the unreleased and b-sides recently made me love U2 even more. I can't help it, I love their sound, and they do have a trademark sound. This is not a bad THING!!!!!!!!!!!! I don't see people faulting The Beatles or Led Zeppelin or Radiohead with sounding like themselves. If I read one more thing that HTDAAB is a good album, but it sounds too much like the edge or doesn't break new musical ground, I think I might vomit. That is no way to judge an album, perhaps only a band's creativity issues. I will say I love some of U2's other albums more, but only because they have grown on me with time.
Simply put, different strokes for different folks. Some love the risk-taking efforts even if they may fail. Some prefer the U2 that feel confident with their sound. In the end, U2 will put create music that they love. You will NEVER please everyone (Yes, even AB has its enemies). Some will hate it and some with love it and some with still hate Bono no matter what. Some will be disappointed because expectations were blurred to begin with. I know it's hard because we all expect the best from the best, the one band still out there competing with themselves to find that tune. I believe Edge when he says U2 still haven't made their best album. That means something. Give up? Now that's cowardly in my opinion. Just because you think you may never get to that JT or AB place again, is no reason to throw in the towel. Now that is more like being safe with your legacy. U2 risk eveything when they go into the studio each time, but they do it because the music is still there to be made.
I do like the split feeling for this album, though. Too much love sends a caution flag up in me.
Simply put, different strokes for different folks. Some love the risk-taking efforts even if they may fail. Some prefer the U2 that feel confident with their sound. In the end, U2 will put create music that they love. You will NEVER please everyone (Yes, even AB has its enemies). Some will hate it and some with love it and some with still hate Bono no matter what. Some will be disappointed because expectations were blurred to begin with. I know it's hard because we all expect the best from the best, the one band still out there competing with themselves to find that tune. I believe Edge when he says U2 still haven't made their best album. That means something. Give up? Now that's cowardly in my opinion. Just because you think you may never get to that JT or AB place again, is no reason to throw in the towel. Now that is more like being safe with your legacy. U2 risk eveything when they go into the studio each time, but they do it because the music is still there to be made.
I do like the split feeling for this album, though. Too much love sends a caution flag up in me.
Last edited:
Moonlit_Angel
Blue Crack Addict
In regards to the teenager thing...when ATYCLB came out, I was 16 and my sister was 12. We both really liked the big hits off of there (matter of fact, my sister even wanted to get the album), and I started paying a little more attention to this band, 'cause I'd always liked them, but for some reason, this time around, I was more intrigued.
And I'm 20 now, and I personally like the new album. I find it interesting that I can relate better to music made by guys that are 23, 24 years older than me than I can to some of the newer music out today. And I've met some teenagers on other boards I go to that love U2 as well, that hold respect for them as a band and as people, that like the new music. Sure, there's some teens that don't care for them-there's some adults that don't care for them, either. But overall, U2 still has a ton of respect from people the world over-you name it, U2 can find people in any group who like them. And I know that when they tour, they're going to do just fine.
If you don't care for the more recent stuff, that's cool, totally your opinion, you have your reasons and whatnot. But personally, I think U2, as long as they feel they can still do this and do well with it (remember, they said they'd quit when they felt their music was crap, not when others felt their music was crap), should go right ahead and keep on going.
Angela
And I'm 20 now, and I personally like the new album. I find it interesting that I can relate better to music made by guys that are 23, 24 years older than me than I can to some of the newer music out today. And I've met some teenagers on other boards I go to that love U2 as well, that hold respect for them as a band and as people, that like the new music. Sure, there's some teens that don't care for them-there's some adults that don't care for them, either. But overall, U2 still has a ton of respect from people the world over-you name it, U2 can find people in any group who like them. And I know that when they tour, they're going to do just fine.
If you don't care for the more recent stuff, that's cool, totally your opinion, you have your reasons and whatnot. But personally, I think U2, as long as they feel they can still do this and do well with it (remember, they said they'd quit when they felt their music was crap, not when others felt their music was crap), should go right ahead and keep on going.
Angela
U2girl said:
U2girl, if i see you typing my nick one more time in posts trying to bash me i'll get medievil on you.
That's a warning. You don't want me tracking you down, i promise that.
Quit calling my name. You don't see me typing about you.
Last edited:
BAW
The Flower
U2_Guy said:
What exactly are you trying to say here? You're going to track someone down and harm them over comments on a message board?
If that's not what you are saying, you might want to take a deep breath and count to 10 before you hit the reply button.
Bono's American Wife said:
BTW, Bono's American Wife, if you keep sticking your nose on my posts trying to bash me i'll get medievil on you.
That's a warning. You don't want me tracking you down, i promise that.
Quit calling my name. You don't see my typing about you.
Oh, and death to America.
jay canseco
War Child
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2004
- Messages
- 810
Does Raid make a product for humans?
U2_Guy I dont really know if you are trying to be funny or what.. but I dont think many are finding it funny as my inbox is receiving complaints about you again.
I suggest you quit threatening members.. joking or not.
"That's a warning. You don't want me tracking you down, i promise that."
I suggest you quit threatening members.. joking or not.
"That's a warning. You don't want me tracking you down, i promise that."
joyfulgirl
Blue Crack Addict
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2001
- Messages
- 16,690
Just because U2 haven't made a record since AB that possessed me the way it did doesn't mean I haven't loved and appreciated them in all their phases ever since. I like HTDAAB a lot but I'm not crazy wildly in love with it. Does that mean they should have quit after AB? Does that mean I won't see them again? Of course not. That's absurd. They are in a different place now personally and creatively, and every artist will lose some fans and gain new fans as they go through these normal changes. It's called life.
Sicy said:U2_Guy I dont really know if you are trying to be funny or what.. but I dont think many are finding it funny as my inbox is receiving complaints about you again.
I suggest you quit threatening members.. joking or not.
"That's a warning. You don't want me tracking you down, i promise that."
For a minute...even for a second, did you really think i was serious?
If u do then i'm afraid of you...
david
ONE love, blood, life
It's really hard to translate humor through text written words over the net without the aid of obvious smiley faces, and or, "I'm just kidding" following up a threat. Especially since your original post didn't contain any of that.
What david said.
Plus thems pretty strong words there...
Plus thems pretty strong words there...
david said:
Oh really, ok. Humour here should be obvious, right?
Hmmm, wait a minute, if it's obvious it's not humour... oh...ok... i'll quit the european kinda humour. I totally forget sometimes this site's kinda dominated by an north-american view of things...My fault.
Last edited:
How about a " " smilie then???
" smilie then???FullonEdge2
Refugee
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2004
- Messages
- 1,314
U2_Guy said:
It's EXACTLY the strong words that reveal the humour...
Humor shouldn't be offensive.
Can we just drop it and get back on topic please.. thanks.
At the radio station I'm at now which is youth based, U2 is not on top of the play list. Does not change what I think of U2 just that for whatever reason they are not appealing to our target group right now (18-35). But like Dr Who said when they come to town they will be the hottest ticket with our audience to.
Anyway it could change week to week with our audience we will see what they think of the new single I suppose.
Anyway it could change week to week with our audience we will see what they think of the new single I suppose.
david
ONE love, blood, life
They haven't taken it too far. They're still making music with content and feeling. They're still making the music they want to make and being successful at it too.
But I think the fact that they're making the music they want to make instead of making the music certain people wish they still made, kind of leads people to dissapointment.
But I think the fact that they're making the music they want to make instead of making the music certain people wish they still made, kind of leads people to dissapointment.
