MERGED--> Grammys thoughts thread+One performance discussion +monkey jumped off !!!

[Utoo]

I respect Teen People b/c as Scary Spice used to say back in the day... children/ kids have the best taste in music b/c they their perspective isn't littered with bullshit self-importance or something to that nature. They have an innocence to their tastes.

LOL

Flying FuManchu, you rock.

 

[Flying FuManchu]

i remember Fred Durst saying u2 were the greatest rock band ever

I remember Bono and Fred Durst working together on some music and Adam saying Limp Bizkit was good.

 

[STING2]

The hole in your argument is this: Kelly Clarkson, and her kind, are not musical tastes that just arrive in the wind organically; they’re force-fed into the minds of 13-year-olds by hulking corporations. It’s not subjective, it’s targeted bombardment of brain cells for pure profit.

Let’s travel back in time for a second for purposes of clarity. When U2 speak of their failings with POP, it is about record sales, yes, but it’s also about not doing battle with the disposable crap like they thought they could. They wanted to take on the commercial monster and beat it at their own game. Why? I think it was to get big ideas across to as many people as possible through the portal we call popular culture. At heart, they wanted to transcend the boundaries and limits of crass consumerism.

With the five Grammy awards last night, they’ve accomplished their mission. They’re everywhere. Bono is on the cover of Time. The ideas are getting across, and U2 is competing—and even bettering—the likes of Mariah Carrey, Clarkson, and other corporate drivel.

But what about the music? Yes, the originality has suffered, there’s no doubt. Bomb is good, but not great. They’ve made their way to the award shows by design, and through a quest to mean something in a fickle world. U2 are a sociologist’s dream.

Musically, they’ve now got the power to "dream it up all over again", and take millions of new listeners with them—if they dare to.

But whether you think BOMB is good, great, or whatever is subjective. The band, many fans, and critics, plus the 12,000 members of the recording academy think its amazing. Other people don't.

Also, U2 have always strived to make the best music they possibly can will charting as high as they can and winning as many awards as they can. 2005 was not much different from 1992 or 1987. In 1987, the entire band was on the cover of TIME magazine. The point here is that the band has always tried to sell millions of copies on every album since BOY, as well as winning awards. The band failed to finish the POP album to the degree that they wanted too and that is what they were disapointed about. The POP album was one of the 20 biggest selling albums of 1997 worldwide. The tour at the time despite low ticket sales in some markets, became the 2nd highest GROSSING tour in history at the time.

 

[RademR]

I remember Bono and Fred Durst working together on some music and Adam saying Limp Bizkit was good.

say it isn't true

 

[Flying FuManchu]

It's true! It's true! It's damn true!

 

[RademR]

what's worse, doing a song with J-Lo or Fred Durst
apparently both were done..

 

[Flying FuManchu]

what's worse, doing a song with J-Lo or Fred Durst
apparently both were done..

LOL... Bono's done songs with Christina, the guy from Staind (Bono said the guy had a great voice), Boyzone (remember that CD found at Hanover Quay), etc. I wanna say Justin Timberlake too, but I could never watch the whole video or listen to the whole song.

 

[RademR]

ya, but that's just Bono for you, strange musical tastes maybe.

At least he never made stupid statements like saying "Hanson's Mmmm Bop is one of the greatest pop tunes of all time."

oh shit....

 

[angelordevil]

But whether you think BOMB is good, great, or whatever is subjective. The band, many fans, and critics, plus the 12,000 members of the recording academy think its amazing. Other people don't.

Also, U2 have always strived to make the best music they possibly can will charting as high as they can and winning as many awards as they can. 2005 was not much different from 1992 or 1987. In 1987, the entire band was on the cover of TIME magazine. The point here is that the band has always tried to sell millions of copies on every album since BOY, as well as winning awards. The band failed to finish the POP album to the degree that they wanted too and that is what they were disapointed about. The POP album was one of the 20 biggest selling albums of 1997 worldwide. The tour at the time despite low ticket sales in some markets, became the 2nd highest GROSSING tour in history at the time.

I guess it's a well-known fact about Pop being rushed because the tour was booked, etc. But, I think the real disappointment, from the band's perspective, was that the audience didn't connect with it. They didn't get the message, the commentary of it all. I think it went beyond sales--there was a glimpse of irrelevance in the telescope.

As a result, I think U2 made a conscious, boardroom decision to be less arty in that moment.

I now want them to be artier...arty is good

 

[ShellBeThere]

phew, this debate is getting....windy....so I can't resist blowing some more myself!

I stand by my stating my opinion that kelly clarkson's song 'because of you' is crap. Don't mean to make anyone feel bad by it, just my opinion.
I surely didn't mean to say I think the grammys are worthless or that most people have no taste or anything negative like that--I was just happy to get a recommendation on something I'd never heard of and agreeing that we/thepublic get forcefed a lot of bad music and don't get exposed to some potentially good stuff. I think it's great U2 got the grammys, and I think they hugely deserved them, and don't see it as meaningless at all. I don't have a problem with 'pop' (as in popular not U2 "Pop", which I also loved!) sensibilities either, but still expect it to be 'good', and HTDAAB was very good indeed.

it's like movies ...
we could all disagree about the academy awards and such as well, and there too it's all a matter of 'taste' ultimately of course. But one can also comment on the culture of the award, who tends to get nominated, why, etc., *and* talk about what we think a good movie should do or avoid.
I recall being utterly appalled when Beautiful Mind won lots of stuff, for example, because I thought it was utter crap, but I surely didn't mean to be getting high and mighty on any level...

I guess it was a little much to go on about soul-pitying, so if I've offended any kelly clarkson fans I hereby apologize!

Originally posted by angelordevil I guess it's a well-known fact about Pop being rushed because the tour was booked, etc. But, I think the real disappointment, from the band's perspective, was that the audience didn't connect with it. They didn't get the message, the commentary of it all. I think it went beyond sales--there was a glimpse of irrelevance in the telescope.

As a result, I think U2 made a conscious, boardroom decision to be less arty in that moment.

I now want them to be artier...arty is good

I agree ...and maybe now with the big ol' stamp of mainstream approval they'll feel safe to get artier again...I love both versions of U2, but the idea of them getting Pop-y again sends shivers of thrill down my spine, I do admit! Now of course, I had to get reacquainted with them in 2000+ before I went back to see what I'd mostly missed in the 90s, so for me at least there was definitely something to their reasoning vis a vis stepping back from Pop...


cheers!

 

[U2DMfan]

WTF... Bono said Nickelback is GOOD essentially. Don't make me pull out the transcript.

Yes he said that, but it is believed by most sane thinking folks he meant a group with a similar name. Some Euro band I can't recall.

 

[jacobus]

angelordevil wrote: As a result, I think U2 made a conscious, boardroom decision to be less arty in that moment. I now want them to be artier...arty is good

spot on! i hope they do more arty rockers in the future and i hope they have the balls to make an album that is more relevant and less mainstream than the last two albums. this is just my opinion.
i hope i hope i hope

shart1780 wrote: The sad thing is that the best U2 albums get the cold shoulder and the worst ones get awards.

spot on i second this

 

[doubleU]

I have come to the conclusion that there are far too many in here that are full of crap and believe in shit rumors. Bono never said Nickelback is good, Pop is not a dance album, there is no song with J-Lo, Adam never said Limp Bizkit was good, this isn't their last tour, and no Bono doesn't have a stand in.

 

[U2DMfan]

Bono never said Nickelback is good, .

See my previous post. He did say it, but he didn't mean it, you could tell in the context of the interview. Because they laughed at him after he said it. Of course, take it out of context and you could see why someone would believe that he actually meant it.


This would have been pre-album hype fall 2004. (I think)

 

[Earnie Shavers]

WTF... Bono said Nickelback is GOOD essentially. Don't make me pull out the transcript.

Go and find that transcript. You're right, he said it, but he said more after that.

 

[doctorwho]

spot on! i hope they do more arty rockers in the future and i hope they have the balls to make an album that is more relevant and less mainstream than the last two albums. this is just my opinion.
i hope i hope i hope


spot on i second this

spot on

Sorry, couldn't resist.

JT deserved the Best Album in '87. JT is not my favorite U2 album by any means, but it was easily the best of '87 and one of the best albums of the 80's.

AB deserved it. Didn't happen. ATYCLB deserved it - especially against the competition it had that year. I would have been fine with HTDAAB not winning had AB and/or ATYCLB won. Part of me thinks HTDAAB won to make up for the fact that those two albums - especially AB - didn't win. That said, HTDAAB is, IMO, better than ATYCLB. And I do feel it stands up VERY VERY well against its competition.

 

[Axver]

This would have been pre-album hype fall 2004. (I think)

It was definitely one of the promo appearances in late 2004. I think (but am by no means sure) that it was during that morning BBC interview at U2's studios.

 

[lazarus]

JT deserved the Best Album in '87. JT is not my favorite U2 album by any means, but it was easily the best of '87 and one of the best albums of the 80's.

AB deserved it. Didn't happen. ATYCLB deserved it - especially against the competition it had that year.

Au contraire, mon frere. Bob Dylan's Love & Theft was a far more deserving winner than ATYCLB that year. I think song for song it may be one of his finest efforts, and it's much more diverse in terms of style than his albums usually are, despite being less focused in theme like its predecessor Time Out of Mind (another masterpiece).

It was sad that a tribute to classic American music (the O Brother soundtrack) lost to what is an original continuation of the great American songbook. Dylan had just won a few years before so I understand why he was overlooked, but I'm still amazed that so far into his career he was able to crank out music and lyrics at that high of a level.

In the end, I'm glad U2 didn't win for ATYCLB because they surely would have lost this year for a record that is far superior in my book, and will hold up a lot better over time. Of course this means that it's unlikely U2 will win for their next album, but you never know what the competition will be like, or how brilliant the recording will be...

 

[DignityPassesBy]

Hey i only just saw the one performance ... i didn't think it was bad but it wasn't great ... she's got an amazing voice like her or not ... i think it was in a different key though well it sounded like it anyway and i think that may of put bono off aswell

 

[waynetravis]

I watched the Grammys lastnight.

Larry looked like he was about to say something, but was RUDELY cut off!!

 

[RademR]

one thing is can say is the band looked like they were relaxed and having fun the other night, which is good.

Here comes the fourth leg

 

[Flying FuManchu]

Go and find that transcript. You're right, he said it, but he said more after that.

LOL... after they laughed at him, Bono being embarassed at being mocked for his unpopular choice by THE DJ, then said, something to the nature of "I meant Razorlight." Now does Razorlight sound like Nickelback to you all? I don't think so. And what is the point of making fun of Nickelback by Bono? In this decade, Bono has never been someone who would slag other bands but instead been more of the diplomat. Why slag Canada's greatest band? On the same show we see a Boyzone cd pop up in a collection of CDs at the table at Hanover Quay (amongst more well known/ respected CDs). Bono and company are asked who's CD it is? Everyone denies ownership. Lets face it, U2 wants to look hip to the public so they won't affirm their love of the Nickelbacks or the Boyzones of the world.

Bono sang in and helped organized that Marvin Gaye cover of "What' Going On." Remember Bono saying,

"I just thought, you know, we're the usual suspects. Don't come to us. We're too right on," Bono said backstage at the VMAs. "Go raid the pop charts. Go ask Britney Spears. Go ask Jennifer Lopez. Go ask 'NSYNC. Go ask the rappers, the hip-hop guys like Ja Rule or Nelly or DMX. In fact, [they] made me go ask them and I did. They all agreed and we've got like 25, 30 of the most extraordinary people on this record now."

As for Adam saying Limp Bizkit being good, the question directed at Clayton was concerning what he thought of the move toward/ prevalence of agro music or rap metal in mainstream rock. Adam said he thought they were "quite good" or something to that respect. This was before the massive Limp Bizkit, Korn, etc hate that is prevalent now.

Durst and his continual connections with U2:

"I'm sure you've heard the JD [Jermaine Dupri] version of 'What's Going On'--well, I'm putting together the rock version with John [Otto] and Sam [Rivers] from Limp [Bizkit], Scott Weiland from Stone Temple Pilots, Head from Korn, Edge and Bono from U2, and Perry Farrell from Jane's Addiction," writes Durst in a journal entry at the band's website. "It's so tight!! And heavy! It has a lot of raw emotion--let me know what you think." He also noted that the proceeds from the track will go to the World Trade Center Relief effort and to AIDS relief."

"Bono [U2] did his vocals this morning from France over the Internet, and it sounds unf--king believable!!," raved Durst in an online diary entry. "The man is a living legend. He has really tapped into the pulse of the world. It's crazy for me to get calls at my home from 'Bono from U2.' It's like, 'Hello,' 'Hello Fred, It's Bono.' (Holy sh-t.) 'Hey Bono, did you like the track?'.'It's so real, I hope you like what I did in the bridge' (He hopes I like what he did?) 'I'm sure it's off the hook...' (He then plays me his vocals over the phone) 'Oh my God Bono, it's absolutely perfect,' and that it was!! I can't believe how good the man is."

All of this shows that Bono and the Durst man are tight yo!

 

[rjhbonovox]

The Grammys....who cares! More and more awards....who cares! They mean absolutely nothing. Is the album that good......not really....then why all this praise? The grammys, to me, represent everything thats crap about award shows. They have about 9,000 categories and seem to give the awards, most of the time, to old bands. The Grateful Dead a few years back got a few awards and they had to dig them out of their graves so they could accept them. Eric Clapton in the 90's when he was about 90 years old got a few, as did Santana when he had that damn annoying album 4 or 5 years ago. Its not such a great thing for U2 to win grammys it just signifies that the grammy's love them and the USA loves them. What about the serious music lovers? Its just about being popular in America these days thats why they spend most of their time over there.

 

[Utoo]

one thing is can say is the band looked like they were relaxed and having fun the other night, which is good.

Here comes the fourth leg

And now after watching that cnn.com interview, I want some pizza!

 

[Flying FuManchu]

What about the serious music lovers? Its just about being popular in America these days thats why they spend most of their time over there.

LOL at the guys who work in music (alah the sound engineers, producers, etc. who actually are the ones who vote) not being serious music lovers.

 

[Utoo]

LOL at the guys who work in music (alah the sound engineers, producers, etc. who actually are the ones who vote) not being serious music lovers.

Oh, but FFM, to be a serious music lover, you have to like small, unknown bands that lie and say they don't want to be famous, make non-"mainstream" music (though it's pretty "mainstream" for the genre) and are comprised of skinny white dudes wearing clothes from the Salvation Army.

 

[RademR]

All of this shows that Bono and the Durst man are tight yo!

fo shizzle. he's going to be on one of the tracks of that new u2 hip hop album

 

[ShellBeThere]

well, you know folks, I just saw on yahoo news frontpage that 'american idol crushed the grammys in the ratings', so nobody apparently gives a shit in america about them anyway lol!

I loved your analysis angelordevil, from a few pages back, about U2 being a sociologist's dream. I think you well described their quest at a certain level, and I'm just so happy that they're engaged in it...the artier stuff *and* the more immediately accessible.
I never felt that they backed off 'who they were' or anything, just adjusted perhaps what they were doing, as part of their big-picture and as part of their give-and-take within the band it sounds like at times...

cheers!

 

[chickadee]

On the same show we see a Boyzone cd pop up in a collection of CDs at the table at Hanover Quay (amongst more well known/ respected CDs). Bono and company are asked who's CD it is? Everyone denies ownership.

That would seem a lot more credible had U2 not had Boyzone in the 'Sweetest Thing' video. Secret fans? I think so! (And rightly so - I was a massive Boyzone fan!)

 

[karint]

Who was the blonde lady sitting with the band?