MERGED ----> U2 has finally sold out + On selling out

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thanks, Fu Manchu...

I was just about to compose my own list. So many details. Of course, then someone would say that we're nitpicking. What's the use then?
 
GibsonExplorer said:
I think bitching and whining is better than mind-numbing adoration and ass-kissing.

Do you actually understand that because you don't like the direction U2 is taking doesn't exactly make your opinion any more right than my mind-numbing adoration and ass-kissing.

It's all subjective. As they say here in interference, that's just your and my opinion.

No need to freak out. Luckily I don't make a habit of bashing other bands because I can only assume that their fans like their music and just because I might not like it doesn't necesarily mean it sucks.

I'm a big Grateful Dead fan, and all of this sellout talk has really made me see the light. Tomorrow I'm burning my collection of Jerry ties and I will never again buy B&J ice-cream.

Thanks for helping.
 
The Stone Roses... now there was a good band.

And about the recycling... The Beatles were genius at this. And let's face it, their stuff was mainly crap.
 
Last edited:
Flying FuManchu said:


People have said the solo to ABOY is actually the solo to Last Night on Earth live.... I can't remember the Last Night solo but people have indicated that it is.

Crumbs From Your Table recycles a part of the Walk On solo as a main solo.

Yahweh and One Tree Hill sounds eerily similar.

The old school Edge sound of echo and chimes are littered throughout the album. Note- I like that sound so its not a big deal to me.

The main riff of Sometimes You Can't Make It is similar to a riff found in the ending solo of All I want Is You or Until the End of the World (I think)...

This is some recycling IMO.

IMO

Maybe some people just don't mind? Personally I kind of don't like hearing One Tree Hill in Yahweh, but the rest of the stuff I haven't really picked up on. But then again if U2 have become derivative at least they're borrowing from themselves and their past 25 years of musical existence. There are too many popular bands that have become the darlings of magazines and people think they're the greatest bands ever but they are derivative of other bands and probably wont be around long enough to ever borrow from themselves.
 
It's good to know that I write an extremely long, detailed response to GibsonExplorer and he simply avoids it. He knows he's in the wrong, here.
 
Flying FuManchu said:


People have said the solo to ABOY is actually the solo to Last Night on Earth live.... I can't remember the Last Night solo but people have indicated that it is.

Crumbs From Your Table recycles a part of the Walk On solo as a main solo.

Yahweh and One Tree Hill sounds eerily similar.

The old school Edge sound of echo and chimes are littered throughout the album. Note- I like that sound so its not a big deal to me.

The main riff of Sometimes You Can't Make It is similar to a riff found in the ending solo of All I want Is You or Until the End of the World (I think)...

This is some recycling IMO.

IMO

"People have said", "I think"
That is 4 songs out of 12, and the only song that I do agree with you is on the solo from Crumbs from your Table(which is similar but not the same) "The old school Edge sound of echo and chimes are littered throughout the album." The edge said himself thats how he plays, that is U2, that is part of the reason I love U2 is for the echoing sounds of The Edge, this album only gives us reason to REJOICE, for a great new U2 album has come!
 
When U2 first broke in 1980 they didn't sound like anyone else, more because they barely knew how to make proper music, but now 25 years later they're guilty now of sounding like... U2... Is that really a bad thing?
 
david said:
When U2 first broke in 1980 they didn't sound like anyone else, more because they barely knew how to make proper music, but now 25 years later they're guilty now of sounding like... U2... Is that really a bad thing?

I know dude, I cant understand it myself?
 
octobermagic said:
So ID, you believe they were sell outs because because you didn't like the Zooropa or Pop albums? Because the music was like "ghetto techno pop"?

Ok.

Sorry, not what I meant. I meant they were more sell outs then than now. I didn't mean to say Zooropa and Pop were bad, but seriously, they're way better now, and their image has kind of cleaned up.
 
Miggy D said:
It's good to know that I write an extremely long, detailed response to GibsonExplorer and he simply avoids it. He knows he's in the wrong, here.

Actually, I made my point and you made yours. Like you said, why waste time on arguing back and forth? Have you forgotten already?

You didn't say anything that I didn't expect you say, and that's why I didn't reply. Since you want me to give you some recognition over your hard work, here it is. It was well-earned, and I'm so sorry I've ignored you before.
 
GibsonExplorer said:


Actually, I made my point and you made yours. Like you said, why waste time on arguing back and forth? Have you forgotten already?

You didn't say anything that I didn't expect you say, and that's why I didn't reply. Since you want me to give you some recognition over your hard work, here it is. It was well-earned, and I'm so sorry I've ignored you before.

I didn't say anything you didn't expect me to say? :( I give you the benefit of the doubt and don't assume I know what's going to come out of your mouth before you say it. I don't want recognition of hard work from you, but it was the first time I've responded to you (everyone else and their mom seems to have already). I just thought that by ignoring my points you were perhaps accepting that they were right. But hey - it was a bit of work, and I appreciate the acknowledgement. :wink:
 
doctorwho said:


Yep, completely different principles...

For example, they never gave a free concert before - oh wait, they did in L.A. in 1987.

Well, the never associated with corporations before - oh wait, they did with MTV, VH-1, K-Mart, Target, and Best Buy from 1984 through 2001.

Well, they certainly never appeared on a commercial playing their music - oh wait, they did, when they advertised the "Best Of" in 1998.

Well, they never appeared on so many TV shows playing their music now like they did then - oh wait, they did many times in the past, as way back as 1980.

Well, they never charged so much for their music - but wait, the new album costs only $7.99 at Best Buy (and as a long time music fan, this was the price of albums back in the 70's!!!) and one can download a whopping 450 songs for $150 - that's $0.33 per song - cheaper than the 70's when a 45 rpm cost a $1 for 2 songs.

Well, their music seems recycled and stale now - but wait, wasn't "War" just a fine-tuning of "Boy" and "October"? Wasn't JT a fine-tuning of UF? Wasn't R&H essentially JT-Part 2? Wasn't "Zooropa" AB-Part 2? Or was that "Pop"?

Well, they certainly never looked as ridiculous - except for the mullets, the whole ZOO TV image and the whole shaved head "Pop" image.

Every single argument you make, I've heard. I've been a fan since 1983. I've played on on-line U2 forums and newsgroups starting in 1993. And all the arguments I hear now, I heard then. In 1988, people said R&H was too dark and not original. In 1992, people said "U2 sold out".

It seems to me that it's not U2 who has lost their originality or sold out - rather, it's the fans. The same arguments year after year. And yet, amazingly, here you are playing on a U2 fan site, buying the music and I bet you'll be in line for concert tickets. Funny how that works.

Can't wait to hear you bitch about the concert ticket prices (something that also started in 1988), Bono's voice (something that started in 1987, and really earlier with his rather weak vocals on "War"), or their concert performances (again, something people bitched about plenty in 1987 when they couldn't see U2 if they were anywhere but the front row).

:yes: :applaud:

Well said!!
 
Miggy D said:


I didn't say anything you didn't expect me to say? :( I give you the benefit of the doubt and don't assume I know what's going to come out of your mouth before you say it. I don't want recognition of hard work from you, but it was the first time I've responded to you (everyone else and their mom seems to have already). I just thought that by ignoring my points you were perhaps accepting that they were right. But hey - it was a bit of work, and I appreciate the acknowledgement. :wink:

You're welcome.
 
U2 are throwing their weight behind a new medium of music distribution. Last year legal downloads accounted for 3% of all music sales. That number will continue to grow. U2 know that. They've partnered with Apple, not because of huge $25,000,000 payouts, but because Apple had the most complete and realised vision of the online music store. U2 get free exposure, ITunes becomes more mainstream. U2 and Apple are doing what the rest of the music industry and the RIAA haven't done. They're embracing the new technology, not filing lawsuits.
You sell out people can dismiss this as BS. It also means you're completely missing the point. It's not as if U2 are whoring out for Cola. Some one here mentioned reading "At The End Of The World" again. Very good advise. In 1993 the band envisioned a day when they could finish recording an album, upload to a PC, and sell straight to their fans. Eliminating the record company from the transaction. The only way that will EVER happen, is if legal downloading becomes very widespread and accepted.
This is good for other artists as well. ITunes are in talks with CDBaby, one of the internet's leading "indie" distributors, to start selling music on ITunes. You don't need a record company to sell a CD with CDBaby, all you need is a record. I'd done this.
Which is not to say the whole thing couldn't go to shit. Bono has said he's amazed at how cooperative the record company has been about all the ITunes promotion. Prices at ITunes could go up, and that would be bad. For right now, I think it's brave.
 
Last edited:
I think U2 sold out with POP when they lost their marbles and greatly compromised their artistic integrity. After losing their marbles temporarily during the POP era, they have gotten their bearings back for ATYCLB and HTDAAB.

POP was a sellout because U2 released it before it was finished. What other artist would release unfinished work if not for selling out just so that they will be able to tour immediately? Also, the body of work of POP is greatly influenced by the "in" music of that era which was Beck, Chemical Brothers, and Prodigy kinda music. U2 were aiming only for commercialism and attempted to incorporate sounds to their music that they felt would sell well even if their artistic integrity was sacrificed. U2's intelligent fans so through this thin-veil of selling out hence the album sold so little.

With ATYCLB and HTDAAB, U2 took some time to make it and made sure it was finished. I loved the story about Clayton and Mullen preventing the album from being released last year so that they could work on it more. HTDAAB is just U2 sounding like U2. I don't see anything that's a sellout in it. The "in" music of today would be R&B and Hip-Hop and can you imagine if U2 would cheapen themselves and incorporate rap and hip-hop intor their songs just to be "in"? Of course U2 would never do that and sellout. They already tried (with trip-hop) during the POP era and miserably failed.

So in summary, U2 aren't sellouts now. But they did try selling out at one point in their careers and that was during the POP era.

Cheers,

J
 
jick said:
I think U2 sold out with POP when they lost their marbles and greatly compromised their artistic integrity. After losing their marbles temporarily during the POP era, they have gotten their bearings back for ATYCLB and HTDAAB.

POP was a sellout because U2 released it before it was finished. What other artist would release unfinished work if not for selling out just so that they will be able to tour immediately? Also, the body of work of POP is greatly influenced by the "in" music of that era which was Beck, Chemical Brothers, and Prodigy kinda music. U2 were aiming only for commercialism and attempted to incorporate sounds to their music that they felt would sell well even if their artistic integrity was sacrificed. U2's intelligent fans so through this thin-veil of selling out hence the album sold so little.

With ATYCLB and HTDAAB, U2 took some time to make it and made sure it was finished. I loved the story about Clayton and Mullen preventing the album from being released last year so that they could work on it more. HTDAAB is just U2 sounding like U2. I don't see anything that's a sellout in it. The "in" music of today would be R&B and Hip-Hop and can you imagine if U2 would cheapen themselves and incorporate rap and hip-hop intor their songs just to be "in"? Of course U2 would never do that and sellout. They already tried (with trip-hop) during the POP era and miserably failed.

So in summary, U2 aren't sellouts now. But they did try selling out at one point in their careers and that was during the POP era.

Cheers,

J

Jick, I agree with you. Pop was musically compromised by business decisions, these last two albums are actually quite "uncool" in terms of modern charts. I can't agree with the opinion that U2 have sold-out musically. If this album is a musical sell-out, then it's a pretty damn good one!
Commercially, yep, they are playing the game I guess, but to be honest would anyone in this forum do anything different to what U2 are doing? U2 are not our friends, they aren't obliged to give us all free tickets and come to our birthday parties. They are two things, musicians; and a brand. They are successful at both, and I admire them for that. Downloading is the future. The smart little Irishmen that are U2 are staying one step ahead of the field, as they always do.
 
jick said:
I think U2 sold out with POP when they lost their marbles and greatly compromised their artistic integrity. After losing their marbles temporarily during the POP era, they have gotten their bearings back for ATYCLB and HTDAAB.

POP was a sellout because U2 released it before it was finished. What other artist would release unfinished work if not for selling out just so that they will be able to tour immediately? Also, the body of work of POP is greatly influenced by the "in" music of that era which was Beck, Chemical Brothers, and Prodigy kinda music. U2 were aiming only for commercialism and attempted to incorporate sounds to their music that they felt would sell well even if their artistic integrity was sacrificed. U2's intelligent fans so through this thin-veil of selling out hence the album sold so little.

With ATYCLB and HTDAAB, U2 took some time to make it and made sure it was finished. I loved the story about Clayton and Mullen preventing the album from being released last year so that they could work on it more. HTDAAB is just U2 sounding like U2. I don't see anything that's a sellout in it. The "in" music of today would be R&B and Hip-Hop and can you imagine if U2 would cheapen themselves and incorporate rap and hip-hop intor their songs just to be "in"? Of course U2 would never do that and sellout. They already tried (with trip-hop) during the POP era and miserably failed.

So in summary, U2 aren't sellouts now. But they did try selling out at one point in their careers and that was during the POP era.

Cheers,

J

Man I love Jicks posts, there fricken hillarious! Seriously
 
Heheheh Jicks sell out post is hilarious heheheh, they sell out by releasing an album that is so far from sounding like U2 its unbelievable, and then release two albums that are totally U2 sounding and thats not selling out hehehe yeah that sounds right hehehee unbelievable I can not stop laughing about that hehehehe hey Miami is a total sell out song wowwo and Beautiful Day isn't heheheheheeheheh
 
rjhbonovox said:


When you see the light you will see the light I suppose. I have and for the past twenty years this band could do no wrong, absolutely no wrong in my eyes, I even defended the last album but this has totally opened my eyes. Bono used to be my all time hero but to see how he has become and some of the things he now says he is quickly going down in my estimation. If you asked Bono 10 years ago "Hey wanna appear at half time in the superbowl, Bono?" get the fuc# outta here would have been his swift and short reply!:wink:

U2 want to stay relevant and they can not rely on MTV or VH1 the way they could years ago. They are no longer the darlings of these channels. So they do halftime shows, SNL, Itune commercials....etc. By the way let's not forget the halftime show was a tribute to 9/11 victims. By the way if this guy was your hero what are some of the things he has said over the past 10 years that have taken him down a notch in your book? I have read some people say U2 are sell outs for the doing th i-tunes deal but no money was given to U2 to do this and what is wrong with u2 saying here is a place where you can buy our music? What is the difference in this and them advertising one of their tours? by the way rjhbonovox will you be attending any concerts on this tour or are you completely done with the band
 
Of course I will be seeing them cos I havent missed a tour since 1985 so I have to but my opinion on the last 2 albums well I can't see that changing in the near future.
 
A band sounding like it has sounded before...or similar...is actually the opposite of 'selling out.' Changing one's sound artificially in order to make money is considered 'selling out.' The members of U2 are some of the richest in the United Kingdom. I seriously, seriously doubt they're making albums for the money.
 
Miggy D said:
A band sounding like it has sounded before...or similar...is actually the opposite of 'selling out.' Changing one's sound artificially in order to make money is considered 'selling out.' The members of U2 are some of the richest in the United Kingdom. I seriously, seriously doubt they're making albums for the money.

great point, i agree.
 
Well Gibson thinks he's so smart I guess because he knows he gonna get torn apart for his post. Well done indeed!!! you really are a rocket scientist.

I really don't know where to begin with this moron, but I have to start somewhere.

Actually, you know what, I'm not gonna start (I just erased a whole bunch of writing because I knew it would take too long to finish!).

Gibson, go and find yourself an underground band struggling to sell a record, sounds like that's the only kind of band you could ever respect.

By the way, good on you for spending money to join a U2 fan site - definetely money well spent on your part.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom