Here's what I'm worried about...

[Zoocoustic]

...winning Album of the Year (and the other 4 awards) makes U2 think that they can make another album like it and that's what the general public wants.

I hope they try something bold and daring next time...I think losing a few of the awards might have sparked them to do just that...to think they need to change it up a bit.

I hope I'm wrong, because while I don't mind the last two albums, I think they could do a lot more if they were motivated...and losing these awards may have been motivation enough.

 

[U2Man]

....or maybe they feel that they really have something to live up to now....

 

[VertigoGal]

I have the same thoughts, the constant ass-licking will go to their heads and already has possibly.

but in the end I don't care too much because they've made tons of great music as it is...I mainly only care that they play a few more shows in my home city before they retire, honestly.

but I do get what you're saying though. we'll just have to see what they do with their next one.

 

[xaviMF22]

Yea I hope that they don't get a big head after winning grammies. I hope that by winning grammies it inspires them to do something different. ATYCLB & HTAAB are great records but I dont another one in the same vein.

 

[t8thgr8]

well they lost for atcylb... and they lost for achtung.... and after those came similar follow ups. They won for JT.. out came achtung baby. so Id say were in for something strange. They pretty much have the green light to be free again. Bono said its already gone to their heads and you know theyre itching to shake things up.

 

[t8thgr8]

I think if they wouldve lost it wouldve only motivated them to try harder at this current sound so that perhaps they can finally get the big prize again since they seem to keep getting nominated with it. Mission accomplished, full steam AHEAD.

 

[trevster2k]

Whatever they do for the next album, some people will hate it cause you can't please all the people all the time.

I think that the band has achieved success on all measurable levels for musicians. Based on past comments by the band, and like anyone in any field, people want to be successful. How do you measure that in music? A whole bunch of different ways, I suppose. Record sales, critical acclaim, awards, tour sellouts, recognition and respect from peers and I'm sure there are many more. But U2 has now achieved all these accolades and Bono always talks about they still haven't recorded their perfect album yet. Plus don't forget as they age, their perspective on life changes, they don't think like 20 year olds anymore, although they definitely are young at heart. Does U2 record music for themselves, for the fans or for the critics? I guess we will find out in a few years who they want to please next.

 

[doctorwho]

U2 won Album of the Year in 1987. JT also sold 5M copies in the U.S. in 1987. Yet, U2 went on to record R&H, which is a far darker JT and has signs of AB, and then, of course, AB.

To me, HTDAAB is a better version of ATYCLB (I know many disagree - this is my view). Many feel JT is a better version of UF.

But now that U2 have done these two albums, I think even they want to change - and we can hear proof of this with songs like "Fast Cars", "Love & Peace" and "Vertigo". Even "Mercy" - which has elements from UF in it, is very progressive and bodes well for the future.

So I'm not worried about U2 creating yet another ATYCLB or HTDAAB.

 

[STING2]

...winning Album of the Year (and the other 4 awards) makes U2 think that they can make another album like it and that's what the general public wants.

I hope they try something bold and daring next time...I think losing a few of the awards might have sparked them to do just that...to think they need to change it up a bit.

I hope I'm wrong, because while I don't mind the last two albums, I think they could do a lot more if they were motivated...and losing these awards may have been motivation enough.

But if you think the BOMB is the best album of the past 10 years, making another album of equal or better quality is nothing to be afraid of.

Honestly, the song MERCY is a little hint of what the next album will be like I think.

 

[Axver]

I love how the anti-HTDAAB crowd is now splitting in two and both using the same evidence to support their case. Some think this Grammy's win will just lead U2 to make more of the same, while others think it means U2 are going to be really daring.

I personally don't think the Grammy's is really going to have a bearing. I doubt winning a particular award is going to that seriously impact the band's sound.

 

[cobl04]

I am so glad they sweeped up. How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb is a terrific album, and it's time some people here realised that.

Personally I really don't care what U2 do next because I'm not immediately going to compare it to Achtung Baby or Zooropa or Pop or even 80's music. Besides, I think the music they have made so far in this decade is magnificent.

Beautiful Day, Walk On, Kite, When I Look at the World, The Ground Beneath Her Feet, Miracle Drug, Love and Peace or Else, City of Blinding Lights, Crumbs From Your Table, Mercy...

Nothing wrong with that lot.

 

[trevster2k]

I agree COBL_04, they have already shown how diverse they can be as artists. The only thing that sucks about U2 is waiting a few years for the next album. I'll be at least 40 when the next one comes out,

 

[Chizip]

I love how the anti-HTDAAB crowd is now splitting in two and both using the same evidence to support their case. Some think this Grammy's win will just lead U2 to make more of the same, while others think it means U2 are going to be really daring.

I personally don't think the Grammy's is really going to have a bearing. I doubt winning a particular award is going to that seriously impact the band's sound.

I dont know. Rattle and Hum was killed by critics, they changed their sounds, then Pop was killed by critics, they changed their sound. Now is it just coincidence that they decided to change at the same time the critics bashed them? I don't know. But I think it might have at least given them the nudge to try something new. This time they have no nudge to change anything they are doing, see the 15 freaking grammies for the last two albums. So if they decide to go in a new direction after such success after the last two albums, I'll have a new respect for them.

 

[catlhere]

God forbid you stick with what you and the majority of your fans and critics are enjoying. Who would EVER commit such a bogus act.

U2 r teh d00med! they made albums everyone but me lyks, so dey suX! b relevint again Bano! no 1 iz listening to dis non-experimental/90's junk!

 

[Meghan]

well they lost for atcylb... and they lost for achtung.... and after those came similar follow ups. They won for JT.. out came achtung baby.

Actually, the album that follows Joshua Tree is Rattle and Hum, which was very unpopular with critics, and then they made Achtung Baby.

 

[Axver]

God forbid you stick with what you and the majority of your fans and critics are enjoying. Who would EVER commit such a bogus act.

U2 r teh d00med! they made albums everyone but me lyks, so dey suX! b relevint again Bano! no 1 iz listening to dis non-experimental/90's junk!

Thanks for missing the point, please come again.

 

[typhoon]

At this phase in their career, I just want them to write good tunes.

My major problem with ATYCLB and HTDAAB was that they were way inconsistent. If they could keep the quality as high as the best songs from those two albums, I'd be happy with it, "experimental" or not.

Honestly, the people for whom experimentation is so important that they've disowned the band's recent work have probably moved on to all that edgy indie stuff and probably aren't going to be happy with anything the band puts out at this point, so what's the point of pandering to them?

(Edit: Okay, I also want them to not take four years between albums, even if that means touring less or letting somebody else save the world.)

 

[Zoots]

My major problem with ATYCLB and HTDAAB was that they were way inconsistent. If they could keep the quality as high as the best songs from those two albums, I'd be happy with it, "experimental" or not.

 

[amerrydeath]

I have the feeling the next album is going to be different as in War - UF different. And good different. Something we haven't heard before. I get the feeling from U2 that they've pushed in this direction as far as they can go and they can explore other areas now.

 

[catlhere]

Thanks for missing the point, please come again.

What point did I miss? The original poster wanted them to change because he felt they could do "more" they also felt that they need to be "bold and daring".

I'm asking why? I'm asking what is wrong with sticking with what's working and why the constant need to do "something different" every album. How many new musical sounds do U2 fans want the band to cover. What if Bono and boys actually ENJOY this current sound theyre making. Why ruin it with another "Pop"-esq attempt. Why are people "worried" about another ATYCLB/HTDAAB? Why do people think U2 are being pigeon held into making these types of songs and now they can be "free". Is it not even the slight bit possible that they're having a great time? So yea, did I miss some point?

 

[lazarus]

I don't know why we're even discussing this. There is nowhere else for them to go with this formula. The band has even acknowledged this. I agree that had they not won all these accolades, they may have been tempted to aim in the same direction again. But there's nothing else for them to accomplish and the band has always been about taking on one challenge or another.

Some people want to be pessimistic about everything, and even though I liked The Bomb immensely, I would prefer them to change it up again, dig a little deeper, go a little darker. And I fully expect them to.

Mercy and Fast Cars are all you need to hear to know which road they're travelling down right now, and while the next album won't necessarily be another Achtung Baby, it will be a step further away from the poppy material on ATYCLB that The Bomb already slightly distanced itself from.

 

[typhoon]

Why does everyone think "Mercy" is a sign of things to come? Didn't they cut it off the album for being too U2y? Strikes me as just a bunch of wishful thinking.

 

[Zoots]

I'm asking why? I'm asking what is wrong with sticking with what's working and why the constant need to do "something different" every album. How many new musical sounds do U2 fans want the band to cover. What if Bono and boys actually ENJOY this current sound theyre making.

There's nothing wrong with the current sound, really. Heck, they could make a whole album full of stuff that sounds as sugary as Wild Honey but if the songwriting and lyrical quality is not on par, it's no use.

 

[Axver]

Why does everyone think "Mercy" is a sign of things to come? Didn't they cut it off the album for being too U2y?

Yes, I believe a review called it a "6:30 outpouring of everything that is U2" or something along those lines, and that was basically why the band cut it.

 

[catlhere]

I'm so confused now. What is "U2"-ish anymore. They've done so many different sounding songs! I'm so lost!

 

[Axver]

What point did I miss? The original poster wanted them to change because he felt they could do "more" they also felt that they need to be "bold and daring".

I'm asking why? I'm asking what is wrong with sticking with what's working and why the constant need to do "something different" every album. How many new musical sounds do U2 fans want the band to cover. What if Bono and boys actually ENJOY this current sound theyre making. Why ruin it with another "Pop"-esq attempt. Why are people "worried" about another ATYCLB/HTDAAB? Why do people think U2 are being pigeon held into making these types of songs and now they can be "free". Is it not even the slight bit possible that they're having a great time? So yea, did I miss some point?

Why are you so outright aggressive towards people who want some kind of a change? It's not necessarily because they aren't satisfied with the current albums or want U2 to do what they like. Personally, the current sound is below what I think U2 could do but some songs are the equal of almost anything they have ever done. And no-one's asking for another Pop-esque attempt, though it shows your bias that you think that will ruin things.

What I and many others do NOT want to happen is for U2 to grow stagnant, to slide themselves into a comfortable rut and stay there. Then their music would just become stale and they'd go nowhere except fading away into oblivion. I'd like to see U2 keep pushing themselves. I don't care if I like it or not. It's just important that their music doesn't become stale. After all, you wouldn't eat stale bread, would you? On the same token, you wouldn't want to listen to stale music, and I doubt U2 want to make it. So yes, I hope they keep pushing themselves to not become comfortable, to put themselves out there, to take risks. The greater the risks, the greater the potential rewards.

 

[Axver]

I'm so confused now. What is "U2"-ish anymore. They've done so many different sounding songs! I'm so lost!

Ever listened to the Best Ofs? Hear the anthemic songs with chiming guitar (typically utilising delay effects) and soaring vocals?

Now you know.

 

[catlhere]

and yet a majority of what this forum likes is 90's U2 that is dark dirty and hard rocking, full of glam and distored vocals. so are they saying they like U2 best when they aren't "U2"-ish?

 

[Zoots]

Axver is right on the money here!

catlhere, I love your posts and think they're funny as hell... but I have to say your anti-Pop anti-Mofo bias shows really well in most of your serious posts!

How can you generalize like that and say that most of this forum wants 90s U2 to return???

 

[typhoon]

U2 has done a lot of things, but they've always sounded like U2 doing them. Their experimentation let them explore more complex musical ideas and new lyrical ideas. I don't think I'm as impressed with the new ground they broke musically (which wasn't all that new, really) so much as the new ways to resonate emotionally their experimentation enabled. I doubt they could've written a song like "Please" or "Wake Up, Dead Man" without doing all the other crap they did in the nineties first.

And really, they're still doing this. If they made ATYCLB without making Pop first, it would've sounded way different. When people here say they want more "experimentation," I can't help but think they mean, "I want more fancy-sounding electronic crap." I think they've never stopped changing their sound, they're just more subtle about it these days and some people are too daft to realize it.

ATYCLB is more sixties pop than anything else they've ever done. HTDAAB is more edgy rock than anything else they've ever done. Just because those genres aren't particularly trendy like dance and techno doesn't mean they've stopped extending themselves.