I've lost 90% of my interest in the new U2 album - Page 4 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Your Blue Room > Everything You Know Is Wrong > Everything You Know Is Wrong Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 03-30-2004, 12:33 PM   #61
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
babyman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: On an open cluster called Pleiades
Posts: 6,246
Local Time: 11:55 AM
after the first albums u2 needed everytime a lot of time to record new albums:1984unforgettable fire 3 years to record joshua tree/rattle and hum 1987...4/6 years to record achtung baby/zooropa(which was done during the zoo tv like we know) 1993...4 years for pop and they say it came out uncomplete...almost 4 years for atyclb...maybe 5 years for the new album...as you see, u2 aren't pretty fast...maybe they want perfection??
__________________

babyman is offline  
Old 03-30-2004, 03:05 PM   #62
New Yorker
 
Flying FuManchu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Used to live in Chambana. For now the Mid-South.
Posts: 3,179
Local Time: 04:55 AM
Unforgettable Fire to Joshua Tree took less than 3 years. Zooropa to Achtung took less than 2 years. They released Passengers in between Zooropa and Pop and also released a movie single... The idea that they always take a long time is somewhat not true.....
__________________

Flying FuManchu is offline  
Old 03-31-2004, 04:31 AM   #63
you are what you is
 
Salome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 22,063
Local Time: 10:55 AM
yup,

but they released the best of the 90's album since ATYCLB
with 2 new songs
and a couple of tracks remixed

so it's not as if we haven't heard anything new since ATYCLB either

I still don't see any real difference between the upcoming album and anything they have released in the 90's except for Zooropa in that respect

well, except for the difference being that we are stuck behind the internet now and are able to read any rumour started by anyone in the band, near the band, slightly connected to the band through several other people, well informed fans and people just making things up
__________________
“Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe.”
~Frank Zappa
Salome is offline  
Old 04-01-2004, 07:31 PM   #64
New Yorker
 
Flying FuManchu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Used to live in Chambana. For now the Mid-South.
Posts: 3,179
Local Time: 04:55 AM
I'll give you the internet and its influence... but the 4 years and two songs doesn't sit well with me...
Flying FuManchu is offline  
Old 04-02-2004, 12:08 AM   #65
Blue Crack Addict
 
Reggie Thee Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Hell Ain't A Bad Place To Be...
Posts: 17,995
Local Time: 01:55 AM
You know, U2 is an older band driven by different influences and passions these days. They're not 20 - 27 with a fire in their loins to pump an album out every other year. Plus the stakes are beyond high since the Joshua Tree came out. In their mid-40s with numerous number one, platinum selling albums U2 feel that whatever they put out must meet a certain standard.

So it's been since 2000 since they released ATYCLB, but face it they spent a year on the road then hit the studio right off and worked right through the spring and into the summer of 2002. At some point these guys have lifes outside of U2 and they deserve to live it just as much as you and I have the right to go home after our jobs and enjoy vacations/holidays too.

Myself, being in the latter stages of my 30s, I completely understand the delay. They have families, with small children who lose their fathers for long stretches of time. It's tough being away from your family and you long to be with them. So consider that also.

Lighten up on the length of time, and give them the benefit of the doubt. Everyone is so quick to blame bad sessions, or dissension, but hell they have other distractions too and those distractions are not all bad in the bands eyes.
Reggie Thee Dog is offline  
Old 04-14-2004, 11:01 AM   #66
Refugee
 
ponkine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chile
Posts: 1,737
Local Time: 06:55 AM
I also already lost my interest in this new album folks.
I've been reading rumours since 2003, and every day the new album delays more and more. For example, several sources said the new album will be available October 2003, then February 2004, then May 2004, now all they're saying November 2004... come on, live us alone.
One thing I'm sure of, U2 is dying now.... Please, before saying me "go to hell, bastard, etc " just listen the radio, watch TV, etc and you can realise nobody cares about U2 now. All that started after The Best Of 1990 2000, a horrible compilation which the fans weren't happy at all
In the new mixes they sounded tired, without ideas. The Hands That Built America was an example of that.
It's just matter of time passing, U2 is an OLD BAND now, the days of glory from Joshua Tree, Zoo TV, etc have died. Bono's voice is raw, with dimished range,etc. Less ideas, less passion, etc, is just part of getting older and older. That's no new, every famous band from the 70's suffered the same... Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple, Pink Floyd, AC DC, YES, etc, etc ,etc So it's time for the band to stop.
I bet you my friend this long awaited new album will be poor, they are working with Hip Hop people and all that... where's the "punk" influence ???

Also the U2 crew is very very selfish and proud, they dont accept ANY IDEA from fans. They deleted the famous DVD petition from the 80s and the 90s, they dont want to know about bootlegs, DVD suggestions, etc.
Is almost a natural thing to believe the last official album is the best on a bands career... thats not true at all... Please my friends, does anyone can tell me JUST ONE band who had their last album as their best ?
I think U2 are so blind about that, they really believe in things like "fuck the past kiss the future" and all that, they dont want to know about their early albums, they dont care about fans feelings with younger U2, etc.
Come on, every band must say "thank you" with all heart to every fan... whats is a band without fans ??... nothing
They should have listened the fans before releasing The Best Of 1990 2000". I remember a U2 poll in which they asked about best song from each album... before best of 1990 2000... so where is "Please" ??
Slane Castle DVD is clearly better than Boston... and began as a fans petition


"FUCK THE FUTURE, KISS THE PAST"

I think is time to give gift to the fans, something like Jimmy Page did recently with "Led Zeppelin DVD" and "how the west was won", etc

Sorry, I didnt want to offend anyone, but is that how I feel about U2 now
ponkine is offline  
Old 04-14-2004, 12:30 PM   #67
Acrobat
 
mobonofo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 432
Local Time: 09:55 AM
HEY PONKINE: So U2 don't listen to their fans, but they released the Slane Castle DVD after a fan petition??? Rather contradictory, don't you think? U2 have always fought against the mainstream and cared about their fans. How many people can say they met the band, as I and many people on this board have multiple times. U2 aren't like the bands you mentioned becasue they actually care about and know about their place in music history. They may not be playing on the radio all that much, but their albums are a part of everyone's catalog. With over 110,000,000 ablums sold over the world, why blame them for taking their time to make sure this ablum kicks ass. I'm as impatient as anyone, but give these guys a little credit. It felt just like this before ATYCLB came out and look what happened with that. U2 are the biggest underdogs in music, but look at their history and how they keep coming back time and time again.
mobonofo is offline  
Old 04-15-2004, 05:36 AM   #68
New Yorker
 
shaun vox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: LA.cal ROCKnRoll city!
Posts: 3,192
Local Time: 09:55 AM
yp u2 are old story bring out the new guns!

today a friend of mine said to me shaun dont you like u2 any more i said no then he said you like them but not as much as you used-too i said yes(true story) u2 are not good any more! do i hate them no, but are they my no1 band no
achtung baby was the last rock&roll album u2 made! and thats where it ended!

4 or 5 years for 12 songs. and only 3 of them are good. ill pass.
time for other rock&roll bands to take over! yp u2 are not played on the radio. so if bono says we are the best band on the planet to that i say, no bono not any more this is not ZOOtv.
i do love their older stuff the days when the rocked!
it might be the lack of creativity in u2 or maby im having a change of heart. or both
maby they are too rich and dont have time to right a good song aka hands that built america>
remember when they wrote songs like BAD,SBS,streets have no name,WOWY,ONE, stay. yp thoes were the days.
hey we do have JT, AB, AND WAR, thats good enough i think.

im just enjoying some new rock&roll bands, you have the darkness from the uk velvet revolver from the usa! and some good old led zeppelin,ac/dc,GNR, and u2 AB and everything before that. its all good in the end.
even if i dont listen to u2 any more ill still post here because this form is great i think im in love with some of you
shaun vox is offline  
Old 04-15-2004, 06:13 AM   #69
Vocal parasite
 
Axver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: 1853
Posts: 152,977
Local Time: 07:55 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by ponkine
I've been reading rumours since 2003, and every day the new album delays more and more. For example, several sources said the new album will be available October 2003, then February 2004, then May 2004, now all they're saying November 2004
Please, be realistic. These were unconfirmed rumours. The band has said nothing official. There is no delay. Look, these guys have been around for twenty-five years, they are the biggest name in rock music today, and they can take their sweet little time. If they want to take time off, if they want to record at their own pace, or if they just don't feel like pandering to the desires of the general public, then they are fully free to make that choice. So what that obsessed fans are getting impatient? That's a very small amount of people. Anyone who knows anything about music knows who U2 are and respects them.

Quote:
One thing I'm sure of, U2 is dying now.... Please, before saying me "go to hell, bastard, etc " just listen the radio, watch TV, etc and you can realise nobody cares about U2 now. All that started after The Best Of 1990 2000, a horrible compilation which the fans weren't happy at all
What are you going on about? People most certainly care about U2. Once you get out of the teenybopper crowd, everyone respects U2, and the reason they aren't mentioned in the media is because nothing is happening right now, but it will be soon. The Best Of 1990-2000 a horrible compilation? In YOUR opinion. Since when weren't fans happy? Sure, we may debate what tracks should or shouldn't have been there and we come up with our own personal playlists, but how in the world does that show we're not happy with it? I design my own playlists, but they'd be a commercial failure. I haven't seen any threads blasting the Best Of, and personally I think it's very good. I don't think many fans have a problem with it.

Quote:
In the new mixes they sounded tired, without ideas. The Hands That Built America was an example of that.
... what? The Hands That Built America is a BEAUTIFUL song, and from the studio version of it, live performances, and Electrical Storm, the band sounds in fine shape. They're not young boys any more, but no-one expects them to be.

Quote:
I bet you my friend this long awaited new album will be poor, they are working with Hip Hop people and all that... where's the "punk" influence ???
Again, '... what?' Hip-hop people? No, they have brought in ONE DJ, and I'd bet that he's simply working on remixes. I very much doubt we're about to see some hip-hop crap, and I hope there's no punk influence either. As Bono once said;

"It's such a clich now. It made some kind of sense in the '50s and '60s. Against a conservative backdrop, that punk attitude had real meaning. Now a lot of it is just dressing up."

Quote:
Please my friends, does anyone can tell me JUST ONE band who had their last album as their best ?
U2's been different to everyone before, so why can't they be different again?

Sigh. It's one thing to be negative about how long the album's taking, but it's an entirely different thing to let that turn into general negativity towards the band. They are doing THEIR OWN THING. What's so bad about that? They're allowed to do their own thing, and they SHOULD do their own thing. I'm happy for them if they're doing what makes them happy, and even if what they make proves to be something I dislike, I'll still be happy for them because THEY like it.
Axver is offline  
Old 04-15-2004, 08:01 AM   #70
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2girl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: slovenija
Posts: 21,090
Local Time: 10:55 AM
Axver GREAT post!

I think part of the negativity is simply the fact that the fans with internet access and those who go to fan forums get more rumors, info etc... and are (more) into following the band and so their reactions may be multiplied compared to a regular fan.
For me, I know I couldn't care less when ATYCLB came out - because I did not know of Interference back then, and I didn't know any rumors about it. Or, I'm sure those fans who have bootlegs debate setlists more than everyday fans who don't have them.

Personally, I'm not sure how I feel about a VERY rocking U2; I'll see about that when the album comes. More than that, I'm hoping to see them on tour *kicks self for not trying harder to see a Elevation show*.

U2 stopping? I think ATYCLB/Elevation success was the push they needed IMO to keep going rather than stop. We will definitely see two more albums and a third Best of - which should conclude the third decade. After that, who knows? They might stop if they feel they aren't into in or if Bono's voice won't hande touring well. I wouldn't have blamed them if they pulled the plug right after Elevation tour.

U2 with their status and their past fame has HUGE expectations to meet each time, and the stakes are insanely high. Maybe that is why their albums take longer ever since AB. (even JT took 3 years) I don't know whether they will ever reach commercial highs of JT times or the artistic peak of AB, but is that really necessary for them to achieve? I'd gladly settle for another song like One, or a big tour instead. (both of which are more likely anyway IMO)
If it's true Bono started to smoke less, (he is now down to 3 cigarettes a week) I think his voice can only benefit from that - Pop album and tour were his lowpoints IMO. Of course he can't hit the notes he used to in his earlier years but what are you gonna do? He still has some pretty amazing things up his (vocal) sleeve: Kite or ES prove that, or Slane live DVD (and scratchy voice does not equal bad voice).
U2 IMO has been VERY good to fans, we got videos or DVDs reaching all the way to JT tour. And the last album had several creative and very interesting moments, as did the MDH soundtrack. U2 always has their best work on their albums - not that I think Hands or ES are bad.
U2girl is offline  
Old 04-15-2004, 12:04 PM   #71
Refugee
 
ponkine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chile
Posts: 1,737
Local Time: 06:55 AM
Hi axver the opinion about Best of 1990 - 2000 wasnt just my own. Please go to yahoo shoping music, cduniverse.com, amazon.com, etc and you can easily realise what the fans think about that compilation
I really love U2 but sometimes I have to admit they make mistakes, like Rattle & Hum Movie and Best of 1990 - 2000, neverthless the DVD is pretty good

Peace
ponkine is offline  
Old 04-15-2004, 12:47 PM   #72
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: This forum just ain't what it was pre-2007 but I still post here
Posts: 71,257
Local Time: 04:55 AM
let's go mets
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 04-16-2004, 01:36 AM   #73
Refugee
 
Ellay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: England
Posts: 2,077
Local Time: 09:55 AM
Dont know about you, but I would rather U2 spend a bit of time on the album and get it right, rather than rush it, and put out a load of old shite, or an unfinished album - ie the pop fiasco
Ellay is offline  
Old 04-16-2004, 02:41 AM   #74
Vocal parasite
 
Axver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: 1853
Posts: 152,977
Local Time: 07:55 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by ponkine
the opinion about Best of 1990 - 2000 wasnt just my own. Please go to yahoo shoping music, cduniverse.com, amazon.com, etc and you can easily realise what the fans think about that compilation
Yeah, I can see what the fans think at Amazon. 62 reviews with an average of four stars out of five. That's pretty good. The fans obviously like it. Three stars of five on CDUniverse from five reviews, which still isn't bad. Haven't checked Yahoo Shopping, honestly I'm too lazy. I frequent a lot of fan communities, and I have never seen major complaints about the Best Of. Most fans I speak to seem to be pretty happy with it, and it must have something going for it because I wouldn't be speaking to you today if it wasn't for that compilation.

Quote:
sometimes I have to admit they make mistakes, like Rattle & Hum Movie
Did I just read that right? The RAH movie, a mistake? If it weren't for the Under A Blood Red Sky video, I'd tell you that's the best thing U2's ever released. Sure, I was only one in 1988 when it came out, but I've read multiple sources that state "while RAH got a critical backlash, it was very popular with fans and the general public." Personally, I don't think it would matter if it really was awful, because as long as it has that epic rendition of Bad, it's still one of the most brilliant things ever.

Quote:
Originally posted by U2girl
Axver GREAT post!
Why thank you! Completely agree with what you said, great post as well.

Quote:
Or, I'm sure those fans who have bootlegs debate setlists more than everyday fans who don't have them.
You better believe it! I can discuss setlists for hours ... I've even started in-depth discussions about them with non-U2 fans!
Axver is offline  
Old 04-16-2004, 06:46 AM   #75
War Child
 
iacrobat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Toronto
Posts: 585
Local Time: 10:55 AM
I'd take the 1990-2000 best of over the 80-90 any day. I am quite happy with it.
I also like the new mixes, Discotheque sounds great and Gone rocks! They sound finished now.

U2 don't appreciate their fans? I have seen very few comments so off the mark. U2 are known for being down to earth and appreciating their fans more than your avergae group. They don't want to put out some piece of crap album to keep people happy.

I'll wait until they are done thanks.
iacrobat is offline  
Old 04-16-2004, 06:51 AM   #76
Refugee
 
Ellay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: England
Posts: 2,077
Local Time: 09:55 AM
Sod off means to 'sodomise'

similar to bugger off,

althoughy sod off and bugger off are equally used affectionately, as well as an insult..
Ellay is offline  
Old 04-21-2004, 10:40 PM   #77
War Child
 
U2zoogirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bogota. Colombia
Posts: 845
Local Time: 04:55 AM
I'm putting my hands over my ears until that album comes out...
besides... if they are taking their time maybe they will put a good and different thing...
__________________

U2zoogirl is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:55 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×