Old U2, New U2. - 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 07-16-2004, 07:54 AM   #1
Refugee
 
Ellay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: England
Posts: 2,075
Local Time: 12:57 PM
Old U2, New U2.

I've never really understood why so many U2 fans are anti the band trying out anything new.

The fact is that U2's survival has been on their ability to change, and write different types of music.

Do you really think that if they were still knocking out albums like October, they'd still be doing worldwide tours - no of course not.

Now I'm not a huge fan of their early stuff, and passengers wasn't really my cup of tea, but I respect their ability to change like they do..

These morons who hate U2 now because they don't play red hill mining town at every gig just piss me off..

Anyway, Just had to get that off my chest.

Cheeriebye.
__________________

Ellay is offline  
Old 07-16-2004, 08:11 AM   #2
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 17,927
Local Time: 07:57 AM

I don't think anyone is anti the band trying anything new. I'm not, but what I am 'anti' is people who bitch about it constantly and complain and refuse to like anything they don't see as 'groundbreaking' or 'taking a chance'. "Experimenting" is NOT always a good thing. You can experiment with sex with monkeys. You can experiment with shady illegal drugs. You can 'experiment' with mixing chemicals until you blow up your house. Those may be 'taking a chance' but they are not good and not smart.

It's also not always smart to put out some strange sounding music that will only have a very limited appeal. (not that U2 ever has) Doing that may be fine for garage bands, but established artists with a reputation are putting their careers on the line with stuff like that. They can play around in their home studios, but the finished product for sale has got to be marketable. Remember, the record company has more to lose than the band, and they are not going to accept and release some weird bunch of shit just for the sake of 'trying something new.' Chicago and Madonna are examples of high end artists who have had albums refused by record companies for being too extreme.

Another thing, what is or is not considered 'new?' To me, the band did things on ATYCLB they had never done before, like "Wild Honey" and "IALW" yet this album gets accused of being a rehashing of the past. I don't hear it. What do you expect, country punk Celtic rap or something really out there to be considered 'new?'

I really don't understand how anyone can hate fans and call them 'morons' when it's always the band and their record company who decides what is or is not recorded or released! I don't see anyone holding any band members down stopping them from playing the balalaika, dulcimer or fiddle on the new album! What they do or don't do is what THEY want, so don't blame anyone else!

footnote: If you are one of those avid "Pop" fans who didn't want the band to change with ATYCLB, remember this: Pop is now 7 years old, it is not new or experimental anymore, and doing that kind of sound again would be *egads* repeating themselves!

Sorry but sometimes it seems most people who pine for 'new' and 'experimental' don't really want anything actually different, just Pop and Zooropa again!
__________________

U2Kitten is offline  
Old 07-16-2004, 09:28 AM   #3
ONE
love, blood, life
 
HelloAngel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: new york city
Posts: 14,534
Local Time: 08:57 AM
I've never met a U2 fan that was "anti the band trying something new" - I know that is one of the many reasons I love U2 so much. They have "reinvented" themselves in every album, and still land on their feet.
HelloAngel is offline  
Old 07-16-2004, 06:19 PM   #4
War Child
 
The Sage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: London, UK
Posts: 564
Local Time: 12:57 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by HelloAngel
I've never met a U2 fan that was "anti the band trying something new" - I know that is one of the many reasons I love U2 so much. They have "reinvented" themselves in every album, and still land on their feet.
Exactly...I don't think there is another band in the history of music who have put out songs as different as In God's Country and Zooropa (for example) and have both very different types of song loved equally by so many fans.

The first U2 song fans heard after the JT/R&H era was The Fly - people were stunned or shocked at first with the magnitude of the 'change' but those millions that loved Angel Of Harlem very quickly embraced this song that would be considered to have a very different style...maybe a few dropped out and some new fans came in at that point but I cannot imagine another band that could make a change of that magnitude without 'fans' deserting in droves.

Of course we could talk about these songs still sharing the 'U2 sound' but trying to explain that would make my head hurt...
The Sage is offline  
Old 07-16-2004, 06:37 PM   #5
you are what you is
 
Salome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 22,043
Local Time: 01:57 PM
I don't like any U2 album because they're trying something new
I like all U2 albums because they are good songs performed well (at least)

it is a bonus that not every album sounds the same
then again, I love certain artists who do sort of release the same sort of album again & again
because they are good at what they do

so yeah
I don't care about being experimental (though Unforgettable Fire and Zooropa are my 2 favourite U2 albums) or about being rock (though besides U2 I also love AC/DC and The Darkness) as long as it's good
__________________
“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 07-16-2004, 06:46 PM   #6
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 20,063
Local Time: 06:57 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2Kitten
footnote: If you are one of those avid "Pop" fans who didn't want the band to change with ATYCLB, remember this: Pop is now 7 years old, it is not new or experimental anymore, and doing that kind of sound again would be *egads* repeating themselves!
Good point. .

Quote:
Originally posted by U2Kitten
Sorry but sometimes it seems most people who pine for 'new' and 'experimental' don't really want anything actually different, just Pop and Zooropa again!
Or Achtung Baby. . Anywho, yeah, I think you're right.

Also, ditto Salome's entire post. .

Angela
Moonlit_Angel is offline  
Old 07-16-2004, 06:58 PM   #7
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 399
Local Time: 12:57 PM
I disagree with the point that bands have a responsibility to uphold a certain "reputation" with what they write. If a band is good, they can write music in any style they want. I know in my head I've said to myself that I could write a chart-topping hit for NSync, but that doesn't mean the songs I write sound like that. It is not a band's responsibility to write songs fans/record companies will like. I know I love it when someone likes my music, but while I'm writing I honestly don't think about that. I remember before ATYCLB came out I think it was Edge who said that they don't think about how successful an album is (Pop's influence on their career)...it's their desire to keep writing and sharing what they produce that keeps them going. Fortunately all of our musical tastes seem to like anything U2 releases...but that doesn't mean they designed the music for that to happen. They reinvented themselves because that's what they wanted...the style they used for any given album captured what they felt in the moment. That's just what I think anyway...
Anirban is offline  
Old 07-16-2004, 07:27 PM   #8
Refugee
 
ThatGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Vertigo
Posts: 1,277
Local Time: 04:57 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2Kitten
It's also not always smart to put out some strange sounding music that will only have a very limited appeal. (not that U2 ever has)
*cough*Passengers*cough*

ThatGuy is offline  
Old 07-17-2004, 01:24 AM   #9
Refugee
 
mofo82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Suburbs of Chicago
Posts: 1,508
Local Time: 07:57 AM
i think it might be important to point out that when people say they want something different LIKE zooropa or pop might mean that the new album be as different to our time as those albums were to those times. being a relatively new fan (since 97), i missed how strange zooropa or pop was compared to what else was released then, so id like to experience a similar happening- new weirded out sweet tunes that blow all others out of the water.
mofo82 is offline  
Old 07-17-2004, 01:29 AM   #10
ONE
love, blood, life
 
MrBrau1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Verplexed in Vermont
Posts: 10,436
Local Time: 07:57 AM
I've been a fan since 83. Zooropa made me hate them. But each release make the back catalogue better and better. I coult appreciate Zooropa much more after hearing U2 make songs like Gone, HMTMKMKM, and SATS.
__________________
"If you needed my autograph, I'd give it to you." Bob Dylan
MrBrau1 is offline  
Old 07-18-2004, 02:42 PM   #11
Refugee
 
isabelle_guns's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,662
Local Time: 12:57 PM
Good question. to me it is not one or the other 'cause I have grown up with so many U2 songs and both the new and the old have significance with me. I like to grow with the band.

I am not anit new and I can't speak for any U2 fan but I think some, not all fear drastic change.
isabelle_guns is offline  
Old 07-18-2004, 07:09 PM   #12
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
gareth brown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 6,592
Local Time: 11:57 PM
Re: Old U2, New U2.

Quote:
Originally posted by Ellay
Do you really think that if they were still knocking out albums like October, they'd still be doing worldwide tours - no of course not.

These morons who hate U2 now because they don't play red hill mining town at every gig just piss me off..
1. October is one of U2's best albums. Had they not gone through that tough patch with their faith and worrying whether the life of 'rock stars' was for them, they never would have matured and written songs like 'Sunday Bloody Sunday' and never would have thought of anything like 'The Unforgettable Fire' (the LP) in their wildest dreams...U2's early records will always be my favourite, there's almost a sense of innocence surrounding their late seventies demo tracks and first two albums. The sound they made on 'Boy' on 'October' creates a sense of urgency and 'power' [really can't find the right word, it's 00:03 over here...] and without those records, U2 would be nowhere...so, whatever they're doing now, it really doesn't do anyone any favours trying to complain about the music that got them where they were...to claim more 'October-like' albums would have prevented U2 from being where they are now just shows you tying your own noose as, like I already said, they matured and found a new sound thanks to that record and it is quite possibly their most important album...

2. We 'morons' are a tad upset because thanks to U2 holding the track from becoming a single on the grounds that Bono would cut his vocal chords to ribbons singing it every night, they decided not to play it at a SINGLE CONCERT...it's a great track! I don't see why we can't hear it live, just once...try putting us down on the subject of a live abscence courtesy of 'Acrobat'....you'll be rather hard pushed...

3. There's nothing wrong with U2's later stuff, I LOVE Zooropa and it's one of my favourite U2 records, but Pop was half-baked. Don't deny it. Not even U2 deny it. They failed to meet deadlines, left songs sounding hollow and empty and it was a rather nasty shock to hear some of the tracks when I finally got round to buying the album after watching 'Popmart-Live in Mexico City' Hearing these superb, stadium flattening tunes being belted out by the band...I wasted no time purchasing Pop, yet when I put the disc in, I was very dissapointed when I heard songs like 'Mofo' and 'Last Night on Earth' both of which [from the Popmart video] are two of my favourite U2 tracks (which means it's a pretty long list if I include live tracks as well)...listen to those two live ones and there is a considerable difference!
gareth brown is offline  
Old 07-18-2004, 11:18 PM   #13
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 20,063
Local Time: 06:57 AM
I don't mind October, either. I listened to my "Best Of" CD this afternoon that has the title track from that album on it, and man, that song is so pretty. Also, "Tomorrow" is seriously one of the best songs U2's ever done, in my personal view.

Quote:
Originally posted by mofo82
i think it might be important to point out that when people say they want something different LIKE zooropa or pop might mean that the new album be as different to our time as those albums were to those times. being a relatively new fan (since 97), i missed how strange zooropa or pop was compared to what else was released then, so id like to experience a similar happening- new weirded out sweet tunes that blow all others out of the water.
Good point. That makes sense.

Angela
Moonlit_Angel is offline  
Old 07-19-2004, 02:49 AM   #14
Refugee
 
Ellay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: England
Posts: 2,075
Local Time: 12:57 PM
I didn't mean that October was a bad album, Some of the songs on it rock. Gloria is fantastic. All I was saying is that the band has moved with the times and some people don't get that.
Ellay is offline  
Old 07-19-2004, 06:51 AM   #15
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
gareth brown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 6,592
Local Time: 11:57 PM
No problem...
gareth brown is offline  
Old 07-20-2004, 04:34 AM   #16
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Polish-American Stronghold PA
Posts: 4,144
Local Time: 07:57 AM
Achtung Baby is the greatest experimental album ever. Talk about going out on a limb.
Oregoropa is offline  
Old 07-20-2004, 12:20 PM   #17
War Child
 
~*Buffalo*~'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Small-Town Slovakia
Posts: 574
Local Time: 01:57 PM
I love old U2 and new U2. Sometimes I like one more than the other, but it doesn't mean that I don't like U2 anymore just because I got through a patch of deciding I no longer want to listen to HMTMKMKM. If U2 has a new song similar to that on their new album, I'll listen to it and appreciate it because I have great respect for U2.

I don't agree that so many fans are "anti" new U2. I know a lot of people don't like Pop or Zooropa or whatever. But there are also people who don't like Boy or October, or even JT. Do you have to like every aspect of U2's music to be a fan? I don't think so.
~*Buffalo*~ is offline  
Old 07-23-2004, 07:39 PM   #18
The Fly
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 211
Local Time: 12:57 PM
Well you have to realize that when U2 reinvents itself each time that it takes awhile for some fans to adjust and that some fans dropoff only to come back on board later. When my first look at Achtung Baby had The Fly rubbing his crotch in a video camera in a live performance I was shocked and appalled by their "betryal" of their former image. It was almost a year before I "got" the "new sound/ irony/ rock star" thing and started loving the album.

Same thing with ATYCLB as Beautiful Day did nothing for me in the first 6 months of radio rotation. Only when I heard it live on some award show did it re-present itself in a new light.

anyway
Reasons (i've come up with) that people have problems with the 'new' U2
--------------------------------------------------------------

POP -
1. Unfinished album. They missed deadlines and had to put it out early, even the band admits it. Plus they ended up remixing all the Pop tracks on the greatest hits (gee wonder why?). This IS the band's fault but hell they're just human.

2. Bad start. The tour did not start well. Reviews to missed queues and botched songs did not translate into full stadiums. Plus the whole cheesy outfits went a little too far in many people's minds. Overblown irony isn't THAT cool. They later made up for it when everything started clicking.

3. Discoteque. The first single's ode to disco (modern at least) complete with YMCA outfits really freaked out the people that were JUST coming to grips with Lemon. Some never recovered. Pitty them.

4. The title-the presentation. But what hurt it most was the misinterpretation that it was full of POP songs. Discoteque started that idea and the band's image didn't help but most people FAIL to recognize that its a very dark album lyrically and also rather schizophrenic in its approach to new sounds (techno) and old (rock & roll, ballads). Most never realized what its STRENGTHS were....but others did. Pop as an album and a tour WAS after all VERY successful.

But there were some disappointed fans. (also see REM's Monster or Blur's Think Tank for a similar fan situation)

so what was the band to do.............

Well they came out with

ATYCLB

1. It was the anti-POP "pop" album. If you loved Pop you probably hated ATYCLB because it was sincere, safe, rock n roll, less experimental. So a lot of fans were happy that the "original" U2 were back but not POP fans or even some Achtung-Zooropa fans...

2. Pop- Frankly a lot of people saw the previous POP image and the real "pop" sound and thought that the band had lost its soul or edge. What they missed out on was that it WAS a deep album and was very soulful. About loss it really made sense AFTER 9/11 and that's when it really "clicked" in the minds of most latter fans. If you weren't listening it probably didn't click.

3. Experimental-If you only wanted U2 to be experimental and to always cut new ground than you probably didn't like ATYCLB either. It wasn't "indie" in the least and wasn't "new" and yet it did well just for that reason. It was a return to basics and it was needed. Radiohead never went back and put out the Bends Part 2 but U2 had the balls to go back and find its roots and make a NEW album and direction in doing so. And it wasn't recycling so much as re-inventing yet again. (if you figured that out)

and so.............

U2 will return again with a RAW rock & roll sound sure enough to add what was missing from the last album as much as piss off the people who loved the last one.

The rule of U2 is that they will always "fix" what they "broke" in the last album and will re-invent themselves yet again.

And hindsight is 20/20.
The Scientist is offline  
Old 07-23-2004, 08:07 PM   #19
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 17,927
Local Time: 07:57 AM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by The Scientist
Quote:
2. Pop- Frankly a lot of people saw the previous POP image and the real "pop" sound and thought that the band had lost its soul or edge. What they missed out on was that it WAS a deep album and was very soulful. About loss it really made sense AFTER 9/11 and that's when it really "clicked" in the minds of most latter fans. If you weren't listening it probably didn't click.
Are you talking about Pop or ATYCLB 'clicking' after 9-11? It was ATYCLB that really clicked in. I saw a show before and 2 shows after and you could tell it, even the band knew it.
U2Kitten is offline  
Old 07-23-2004, 08:42 PM   #20
The Fly
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 211
Local Time: 12:57 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2Kitten


Are you talking about Pop or ATYCLB 'clicking' after 9-11? It was ATYCLB that really clicked in. I saw a show before and 2 shows after and you could tell it, even the band knew it.
ATYCLB, sorry i wasn't more clear

Pop sound- Frankly a lot of people saw the previous POP (the album) image and the real "pop" sound (of ATYCLB) and thought that the band had lost its soul or edge. What they missed out on was that it WAS a deep album and was very soulful. About loss it really made sense AFTER 9/11 and that's when it really "clicked" in the minds of most latter fans. If you weren't listening it probably didn't click.
__________________

The Scientist 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 07:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×