More new U2 album discussion!

[Rachel D.]

I see we're back to dissecting NLOTH.

 

[LuckyNumber7]

I see we're back to dissecting NLOTH.

Just buying time

 

[Mrs. Garrison]

So much sin, not enough sinners

 

[Vlad n U 2]

Has anyone said that they hate Boots yet?

 

[Edge Evans]

It's their Dancin in the dark. Except it was highly unpopular to the masses.

 

[digitize]

I think that Boots is a great song with great lyrics about hedonism in the face of deep and serious events.

 

[LuckyNumber7]

Has anyone said that they hate Boots yet?

Guilty! I kinda rehashed the usual criticism of NLOTH.

 

[purpleoscar]

Boots had great music even if Dave Gahan pointed out it sounded like 2 songs put together.

Especially the drums sounding like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbrjRKB586s

Of course Miami features similar drums.

 

[popacrobat]

I think that Boots is a great song with great lyrics about hedonism in the face of deep and serious events.

Sometimes I think we're the only two people around that actually like the song.

The single version of Crazy Tonight (much better production than the album version) has grown on me the past four years as well. I still maintain they should have released a version with buildup like the song had in the Blackberry ad. Wish that version saw the light of day somewhere.

A few posts back I think it was U2DMfan (or somebody ,sorry if that's wrong, really don't care enough to see who said it) said that you hear all of Magnificent in x amount of time. Crazy Tonight sort of suffers from that same fate, aside from the ending (see: the solo in Magnificent). Both songs could have used more musical buildup to launch them into a different place.

Also, some sort of different ending could have helped the song too. Incorporating the "you know I'll go crazy" chant that you see in the live version, or in the studio version of the live version -- I have it labeled as the Kick the Darkness vocal. not sure if that's right, but whatever. starts around the 4:30 mark. building the song up to that in its studio form and then exploding to end could have helped, too.

I still like both, mind you.

 

[popacrobat]

so basically every version but the album version of Crazy Tonight is better. the end.

 

[bonocomet]

Sometimes I think we're the only two people around that actually like the song.

Well I have been defending the fact that I like the song here for the last 4 years. I've even been ridiculed here for liking it.

 

[popacrobat]

i need to read more internet posts. that makes three of us.

 

[AcrobatU2Pop]

I really like Boots as well. Wasn't crazy about it being the lead off single, but it's still a good song.

 

[LuckyNumber7]

I liked Boots way before all of you even knew about it!

 

[AcrobatU2Pop]

I knew I loved you before I met you.

 

[bonocomet]

 

[purpleoscar]

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

mind if ask why?

The number one insult of u2 by non u2 fans is that Bono is an insufferable egomaniac. That verse is the first time I agreed with them.

 

[kingofsorrow]

The number one insult of u2 by non u2 fans is that Bono is an insufferable egomaniac. That verse is the first time I agreed with them.

you know i can see why they would think that.
i personally thought he was saying those words to god.

 

[LuckyNumber7]

That's the impression I got as well.

 

[Vlaco]

About Boots: I dig the rhythm section very much and the riff is catchy too. The music is good, but the song isn't that great.

 

[An Cat Gav]

re: Magnificent

If you skip the intro and begin at 0:46 and listen to 2:22, that's 1:36. 96 seconds and you have heard the whole song. You've heard the hook/riff. You've heard the verse melody. You've heard the crescendo ("oh, oh") and you've heard the chorus. Short of the bridge/solo, you have already heard the extent of the song.

And there are still 3 minutes left in the song. People complain about the bridge/solo, IMO, not because it's particularly bad, but because it doesn't take the song anywhere else. It doesn't feel like a different chapter, to me.

But the bridge/solo aside, the song had effectively, already peaked. It is front loaded. There is no natural build up to it once it has...arrived. And this is the type of song that could have stood to be treated with some subtlety. Dumping the churning B-riff from the outset. They should have began with the verse, using the same chords, but different instrumentation - then when we come out on the other side of the first chorus, we hear that full 'dance' feel for the first time - we're moving somewhere - then we would hear that crescendo "oh oh" and the driving guitar for the first time. The song is now moving somewhere else. And then when we fall into the bridge/solo it feels, possibly, more interesting to some people.

As is, there is no anticipation in the song once it moves from intro to the opening riff. Which is most likely why they put that intro on there in the first place. That should have told them that they had the fundamental structure a little wrong to begin with. It needed an intro but not one that exploded right into the 'hook'. And THAT right there was the problem. They were so concerned with brow-beating the hook...'singles' mentality.

And the chord structure is the same throughout which is fine otherwise but because of that song structure issue w/Magnificent, it's not in this case. Look at WOWY (or even Exit...or others) for an example of a song where the chord structure is the same throughout and yet there are different parts, different counter-melodies. WOWY goes to different places (and you give...).

All that said, I actually really do like the song but feel like there was an absolute gem there that they didn't fully realize. I feel the same - and even more so about Unknown Caller. But there are FAR better targets (when it comes to recent songs) for us to pick on when it comes to what U2 did right and wrong. There is enough right about Magnificent that it can be forgiven. By me at least.

Wow, that's a pretty great assesment of Magnificent.

It's my favourite song on NLOTH. I was working around the corner from the BBC building where they did that impromptu set, so the first time I heard Magnificent was then, so maybe that explains some of the love.

I agree that the song is heavily front loaded and sort of fades away into nothing. After the Edge's solo(which I quite like) the song might as well end. The line "you and i justify, magnify "bit is a bit annoying but apart from that, it's a truly uplifting track.

Like you said U2DMfan, some instrumental variation could have transformed it into a universally loved classic. The FEZ video showing the Moroccan percussionists jamming through Magnificent with the band was incredible, if the song could have started with a minute of that rather than the Will.iam keyboard bit then I think we'd have had a true winner.

 

[mama cass]

It's my favourite song on NLOTH.

mine too, i love the song, it's pure joy

 

[mama cass]

Has anyone said that they hate Boots yet?

tsk who in their right mind would hate Boots?!

 

[FlyingColors]

Could be nothing, but Bono talked briefly about the new album.

Interrogé en aparté sur les projets de son groupe, dont un nouvel album est attendu dans les mois à venir, Bono a confié en souriant que le disque était "très près d'être terminé". Quant à l'éventuelle participation de U2 au concert inaugural du nouveau stade de Nice, le chanteur a été clair : "On a trop hâte de jouer au nouveau stade ! Pour U2, jouer à Nice c'est comme jouer à la maison. Mais le groupe ne sera certainement pas prêt à tourner aussi rapidement. On viendra sûrement à l'inauguration mais, pour un concert, il faudra attendre un peu. Probablement en 2014."

When asked about the band's projects, including the new album expected in the next few months, Bono smiled and said that the record was "very close to being finished." As for the possible participation of U2 at the inaugural concert of the new stadium in Nice, the singer was clear: "We can't wait to play at the new stadium! For U2, playing in Nice is like playing at home. But the band is certainly not ready to return so quickly. We will surely come to the inauguration, but for a concert, it will take a bit. Probably in 2014."

Bono: "Trop hâte de jouer avec U2 au nouveau stade de Nice!" | Nice-Matin

My money's on a mid/late-October release.

 

[AcrobatU2Pop]

Good find!

 

[david]

We gone from "cry without weeping, talk without speaking" to "candy floss, ice cream". Perhaps a backwards step.

Both lines work within each songs context.

 

[Rhiannon64]

Could be nothing, but Bono talked briefly about the new album.

Bono: "Trop hâte de jouer avec U2 au nouveau stade de Nice!" | Nice-Matin

My money's on a mid/late-October release.

Well, that's a bit of good news! At least Bono's talking about it. I'd better start saving for a U2 ticket fund!

Now I'm excited!

 

[FlyingColors]

By the way, this may also be nothing, but it looks like Principle Management (the u2.com domain registrant) hasn't bought any domains containing the word "u2" recently: Reverse Whois Lookup | Domain Ownership Search | DomainTools

The same registrant hasn't bought any new domains for a while, as a matter of fact: Reverse Whois Lookup | Domain Ownership Search | DomainTools (you can see some domains like u2allthatyoucantleavebehind.com or howtodismantleanatomicbomb.com listed there.)

Universal Music Operations Limited, which was the registrant for the nolineonthehorizon.com domain owns 871 .com's, so unless you pay for the report (as another user mentioned a few pages ago), you can't see them all: Reverse Whois Lookup | Domain Ownership Search | DomainTools

They do own a few domains containing the word "u2", but none of them has been registered recently: Reverse Whois Lookup | Domain Ownership Search | DomainTools (there's one domain whose date is not listed, "u _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ n.com", which isn't u2nolineonthehorizon.com; but again, it could be nothing.)

And finally, it seems U2 no longer register their domains with James Cooke from Digital:CC (that company in which Adam's brother works): Reverse Whois Lookup | Domain Ownership Search | DomainTools - all of their U2-related domains are now owned by Principle Management c/o.

I believe Universal has already registered the domain, but since they have so many of them, there's no way of knowing which unless you pay for that report.

Also, no results for "manhattan", "skyline", "reasons", "exist", "ascent" or "2030". Not that the album will be named anything related to them anyway.

I know this is worthless but I guess it's better than discussing NLOTH all over again.

 

[Registered Dude]

They do own a few domains containing the word "u2", but none of them has been registered recently: Reverse Whois Lookup | Domain Ownership Search | DomainTools (there's one domain whose date is not listed, "u _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ n.com", which isn't u2nolineonthehorizon.com; but again, it could be nothing.)

maybe the new album will be a really sweet Hangman app