On U2 being experimental and the fools

[elevation]

What kind of ETs have possessed U2's bodies after the last gig on Popmart...

(Boy, are you a mind reader?! I´ve actually thought the exact same thing - Seriously: What DID happen that night? It's like they gave it all up but never dreamt it up again...) ..

 

[U2_Guy]

(Boy, are you a mind reader?! I´ve actually thought the exact same thing - Seriously: What DID happen that night? It's like they gave it all up but never dreamt it up again...) ..

We are twins separated in the hospital. LOL You were lucky to be taken to Denmark though... I stayed in the heat... LOL

Now seriously, i think we represent a great deal of U2 fans who can't take another ATYCLB...

 

[tkramer]

U2 are being U2, but I'm sad because of that.... ATYCLB was boring borin boring.. I listend to it so many times only cause it was U2 and I'm kind of a big fan

but nowdays I listen only to the When I Look... and sometimes New York. And when I put AB, Zooropa, POP, JT in the cd player I can listen to it from start to end...

This prooves my point exactly. My opinion is that New York and W I L A T W are among the worst songs they have done. Yet I love the first 6 songs.
To me it's only in the albums' later stages that they fall apart.

So there's yet another difference of viewpoint.

 

[VertiGone]

I think the rest of the world would rather have another ATYCLB than another Pop or Zooropa. Is that a good thing or a bad thing? I don't know. I would personally like something in between.

 

[U2_Guy]

I think the rest of the world would rather have another ATYCLB than another Pop or Zooropa.

The casual U2 fan would rather have another ATYCLB. Or the AC fan.

Me, i'm in need of something different...

 

[tkramer]

Honestly, so far it doesn't sound a thing like ATYCLB. It's heavier. And how many people here think LAPOE sounds like ANYTHING else they have done? Wouldn't U2 meets the Who meets some Blues meets JT meets TUF be something new for them?

 

[rjhbonovox]

Peace on Earth is crappy as crappy can be... Oh my... Peace on Earth, Grace, WILATW...

What kind of ETs have possessed U2's bodies after the last gig on Popmart...

Gotta disagree with when I look at the world, I reckon that is a great song and Bono sings it brilliantly, but I agree with Grace and Peace On Earth, they are two of the worst album tracks U2 have ever done. In A Little While is a great song as well and Kite is superb. Wild Honey, a good b-side though and no better. Thats the disapointing thing about ATYCLB, the latter part of it is very weak, with only New York and When I look at the world the saving tracks, thats if you discount the bonus of The Ground Beneath her feet.

 

[Marko]

I think the rest of the world would rather have another ATYCLB than another Pop or Zooropa. Is that a good thing or a bad thing? I don't know. I would personally like something in between.

I think you are right here about the rest of the world...

BUT rest of the world wanted another JT in 1991, but we all got AB and look what happend - it was better than any JT2 album would ever been...

I know that it's important that they make music that they like and that interest them, and I'm not important in a big scheeme of things, but I'm abit sad that I have to go and look for excitement and fullfilment somewhere else,a nd not U2.

I hope that I'm wrong and that I'm gona love the new cd in 2 years time...and the first 2 years, togetrher witht he tour and everything, will be my over the head in loe period so I'm gona be biased

 

[Irvine511]

i'm in the "i heart ATYCLB" camp, but for different reasons. i'm not terribly concerned with how adventurous u2 is musically, if by adventurous we mean sounds, distortion, beats, etc., that we've never heard before. i'm one of those who came into the fold with "achtung baby," and i had no reference for what u2 was supposed to sound like. like many younger fans (i'm 27), i then worked backwards, and for me, there is no a priori u2 sound. if you're looking for mind bending, experimental new sounds, i think you can do better than u2. for a mainstream rock band, they're experimental; in the grand scheme of things, not so much.

while Pop blew me away at first, and it does have some great sounds, i grew less impressed by songs like "mofo" after discovering Underworld. i think it's a strong record, "gone" is tremendous, but the whole thing is oddly cold. i rarely listen to it.

in the end, the sounds are a means to an end, and as long as U2 achieves those ends -- they make me feel how i felt when i first heard "one" -- then i don't care about how "fresh" the sounds are. ATYCLB, however, may be overdone on the singin'-round-the-campfire thing, but i'd rather the humanity of "stuck" to the icy alienation of "velvet dress." what i purchase a u2 record for is the emotion, the drama, the pulse-quickening sense of being alive, of the band pounding back against the void and creating, to quote springsteen, "some place of our own with these drums and these guitars." but that’s just me.

 

[SkeeK]

i'm one of those 'atyclb' criticizers.. buti think ialw is one of my favourite u2 songs of all time. so yeah, what womanfish said.

i liked that experimental/innovative bit

 

[Lancemc]

There are always going to be people who feel U2 crapped out with ATYCLB, but so what? U2 can't please everybody all the time. Doing something different or "experimental" isn't the most important thing in music. What ever happened to merely writing good songs? Now, i'm not saying experimentation or innovation are bad thing by any stretch of the imagination, but the right balance between the two can be heavenly (HTDAAB).

As to ATYCLB, I am eternally greatful they released this album exactlyt he way they did, because without it, I never would have discovered U2. That being said, I don't think it's their strongest effort, but its certainly not their weakest. U2 grew on this last record, and as long as they never produce another JT, another AB, another POP, or another ATYCLB, they are still being innovative among themselves, growing as musicians.

Some of the music on ATYCLB was a little weak, I'll give you that, but 7 excellent songs out of 11 isn't bad (1st 6 + New York). And even the other 4 aren't terrible, it's jsut that they provided an outlet for their creativity. U2 have never before experimented with "pop" music, and I use that term hesitantly. But you know what i mean. Peace on Earth and Grace are two instances where the band just did what they felt like doing, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Let's not forget the rediculously good work on the MDH soundtrack too which is in the same intentions as ATYCLB (musically, not financially). So, U2 Guy and others in his company, if you think ATYCLB is "adult contemporary" (just a stupid though to begin with, but i digress) than don't friggen listen to it. That's the best advice I can give you. If you dont find ATYCLB innovative or exciting, that's a shame, becuase you obviously can't see the subtlety in it.

 

[jcool]

not perfect!....but I still like it! ATYCLB feels like more like a soul album.

Is like the beatles Rubber soul album!

 

[Tintin]

I did a post in the "I miss the accidents" thread about this, but I can't bloody find it.

Anyway, I think ACYTLB is perhaps U2's only album that is filled with a deep sense of calm. Which is a good thing when you need a comforting album. Not my favourite, but it is a very practical album.

I posted this in the "Worried" thread, and it also kinda works here. Sorry if you've read it before.

What is innovation in music?
Since the Beatles, most people boil down innovation to three things:
1. Sonic Innovation - New textures, using the studio as an instrument.
2. Songwriting Innovation - Wacky time signatures, different structures (not the same "verse, chorus, etc." format)
3. Genre Blending - Like the Beatles' Eastern influence, like Bowie's constant dabbling into disco, space rock, industrial, whatever.

Radiohead, for example, has been innovative in all three ways. Bob Dylan has been innovative in ways 2 and 3. (You can certainly disagree, but this is not the main point.)

But I think this way of looking at it misses out on what I think is the most important innovation. Emotional Innovation. When a group writes a song that conveys an emotion not before expressed into the genre their working in, I love it. U2 have certainly done this kind of innovation. Also, some groups have a very special spirit, a chemistry, which breaks through in their music. The songs, upon heavy analysis, may not be very special, but their is a certain something that comes through the music. (For example, think of some of the Rolling Stone's stuff.) A group may not only bring new emotions to a genre, they may bring a new spirit or a new way of looking at band chemistry.

I love the three types of innovation at the top, but I think that the last type is the most important. I hope the new album explores some new emotional territory. Songs that affect me in a new, or a more powerful, way. The other types of innovation would be nice, I would really like some sonic innovation, but it is not as important as the emotions and spirit of the music.

 

[Irvine511]

I love the three types of innovation at the top, but I think that the last type is the most important. I hope the new album explores some new emotional territory. Songs that affect me in a new, or a more powerful, way. The other types of innovation would be nice, I would really like some sonic innovation, but it is not as important as the emotions and spirit of the music. [/B]

:

applaud:

beautifully said. this is also, i think, the kind of music that lasts longer than groundbreaking sonics. while an album like Sgt. Pepper's expanded the possibilities of popular music, and it is expected that everyone tip their hat to that particular album, it's one more for the head than the heart. the best albums (like Achtung) are able to do all these things, but i agree: emotion and spirit are most important.

this thread reminds me of Nick Hornby's review of "Kid A" in the October 2000 issue of the New Yorker:

"... You have to work at albums like "Kid A." You have to sit at home night after night and give yourself over to the paranoid millennial atmosphere as you try to decipher elliptical snatches of lyrics and puzzle out how the titles ("Treefingers," "The National Anthem," and so on) might refer to the songs. In other words, you have to be sixteen. Anyone old enough to vote may find that he has competing demands for his time-a relationship, say, or a job, or buying food, or listening to another CD he picked up on the same day. ... "Kid A" demands the patience of the devoted; both patience and devotion become scarcer commodities once you start picking up a paycheck. ..."

 

[MrBrau1]

Pop wasn't that good. Too much emphasis put on the icing, not enough on the cake. If you can't simply enjoy a record of good songs, I feel bad for you. "Push the envelope" is a bullshit term. Sounds like self indulgent fart rock to me. Kid A is a terrible record, made by art students, for art students.

 

[UnforgettableLemon]

I actually like Pop and All That You Can't Leave Behind very much.

 

[TCUFrog]

same here! i love how they are so different. but i must say, i like pop a little better. had more of an edge to it i guess. i think u2 are one of the few bands that can release an albumllike pop, and release atyclb as their very next album. from the sounds of it, htdaab will be even more rock'n'roll than atyclb was

 

[Teta040]

The way I see it is..


"OK, you guys have got your Mid-life Crisis album out of the way, which everybody in their fifth decade on this earth is entitled to. Now, on with the REAL s***!"

But dang, it was a great mid-life crisis. Glad I was there to share it with you.

 

[jick]

Ho-hum. Another thinly-veiled ATYCLB vs. POP debate thread started by disgruntled POP fans who can't accept that ATYCLB redeemed U2 from the POP debacle and proved to the world what a failure POP was. I think it's time to think of more innovate topic headings. Perhaps after HTDAAB is released, these naysayers will once again bash it for being closer to ATYCLB and not sounding enough like POP.

Cheers,

J

 

[MrBrau1]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. U2 were in outer space for 10 years. Now they're simply writing song records. Their best stuff is traditional, tuff, and emotive. If you really want experimental music, there are tons of Zappa records out there.

 

[JOFO]

here's some great records for everyone to check out:

Kid A
All That You Can't Leave Behind
Pop
Let It Be
The Joshua Tree
Who's Next
Bitches Brew

put 'em on your turntable and let your ass hang out baby!

 

[UnforgettableLemon]

here's some great records for everyone to check out:

Kid A
All That You Can't Leave Behind
Pop
Let It Be
The Joshua Tree
Who's Next
Bitches Brew

put 'em on your turntable and let your ass hang out baby!

You know... those are all damn good albums.

 

[Earnie Shavers]

U2 fans are all so different.

For example, if With Or Without You and Mofo were by two completely different bands, would you instantly expect a fan of one to be fan of the other? Of course not.

I'm sure there were plenty of people who were turned onto U2 by the sounds of JT, and where then lost when The Fly landed. I'm sure there were plenty of people who were turned onto U2 by Achtung Baby and thoroughly loved the journey that was U2 in the 90's, only to be turned off when they released a pop record with ATYCLB.

And that's exactly what ATYCLB was - a pop record. Go back and read over Bono's (and others in the bands) comments in the lead up to it's release. That was their plan. They deliberately steered towards safety. The US reaction to Pop (and Popmart) gave them a fright. There were plenty of comments made about how if in the studio during the 90's they came up with a song that sounded "too U2 of old" they'd trash it or turn it on it's head and make it something else, and that this time around (for atyclb) they would say no, stick with that sound. Bono also commented on making it an album of singles. In the US media time and time again they'd back away from Pop and talk up how they'd gone back to a more traditional U2 sound. There was even Bono talking about how not afraid they were to attack the charts, be # 1 again, how there was nothing wrong with making good pop and how people like Thom Yorke should not be afraid of that and the charts.

The musical creativity was thrown away for safety, Bono's lyrics became very direct and simplified. It sounded like U2 forcing themselves to write U2 songs. It was certainly a sharp change from the momentum they had been building for the 2 decades before. I'd bet that U2 could churn out 4 ATYCLB's a year.

Plenty of people were really dissappointed by this. As plenty of people probably were to hear the grinding, dark Achtung Baby, or to hear The Edge mumble over a few industrial noises, or to hear the bleeps and bumps on Passengers.

I am one of the people that were dissappointed with ATYCLB. It's the first U2 album I've heard that left me feeling hollow. You 'get' ATYCLB on the first listen. I'm still, 13yrs on, gaining new understanding of Achtung Baby, Zooropa and Pop. I'm still finding new favourite tracks that I can't stop listening to on UF, JT, War.

That doesn't mean that ATYCLB is all bad though. There's nothing wrong with U2 going from dark to light. There's nothing wrong with an album that is all hope and promise. There's nothing wrong with U2 releasing a few light, easy on the mind, out and out fun songs from time to time. Elevation came into it's own on tour - it's a great rev up song live. In A Little While is a gem - a great song. The album lacks depth, soul, continuation and that spark that all the others have.

SO - the new one? Well, shit, we've heard what, nothing really.
Vertigo is another Elevation. Only a lot better. Like I said, there's nothing that says U2 can't have fun and just belt out 3 minutes of pure rock for the masses. No-one can be serious and meaningfull all the time, and U2 as a band shouldn't either.
COBL musically sounds great. I hope the guitar has that raw sound to it as the live version does, although I'm afraid that might just be the wind. The lyrics are a let down though. I hope Bono's lyrics aren't ATYCLB II.
ABOY - see Vertigo. Musically I like it. I hope it's in the bottom 3rd of the album though.
Miracle Drug - well, I've heard 30seconds of it....
L&PoE - really interests me. I think this one will appease the 90's fans.

Over all though, there's no way it can be judged until the full thing is all there in front of you. Continuity was a problem on ATYCLB. I hope that's different with this one. Lyrics were a problem on ATYCLB. So far that looks similar, but I hope not. The 'heavier' songs are yet to come. Musically this one sounds light years ahead of ATYCLB.

Just wait for it, then rant one way or the other.

 

[bathiu]

Ho-hum. Another thinly-veiled ATYCLB vs. POP debate thread started by disgruntled POP fans who can't accept that ATYCLB redeemed U2 from the POP debacle and proved to the world what a failure POP was.

Cheers,

J

where, how, in what way?

The only thing ATYCLB proved is that U2 are able to make songs that can be hight on the charts close to Britney and Eminem, nothing more! ...oh yes, and that they are able to make a pop songs...

The problem with ATYCLB is not the sound of this album, songs like Elevation, New York and Grace have the sound of AB, Zooropa and Pop,
The problem with ATYCLB is that after making fun of the whole pop scene with "Pop", they just out of nowhere released a 100% pop album... this, and that a great half of the album doesn't make a great whole album... and that's how it is: ATYCLB's worse half is boring, doesn't matter that those songs are great, boring is boring!

 

[AtomicBono]

I actually like Pop and All That You Can't Leave Behind very much.

Me too - funny how rare that seems to be Pop got me into U2 in the first place and ATYCLB got me back into U2 after I had kinda "drifted away" from them. It annoys me when people say "U2 wasn't U2 on [insert album here]." Yes, yes they were U2, who else do you think they were? They took the musical direction they wanted on each album - just because it wasn't what you wanted (I'm speaking to people in general here, not singling anyone out) doesn't mean they automatically "aren't U2." U2 isn't "experimental" and U2 isn't "safe," U2 is just four guys in a rock 'n roll band doing whatever the hell they bloody feel like at the time, and what they feel like doing now seems to be seriously awesome judging by what we've heard thus far. Never fear, ATYCLB haters, most reviews have said it is very unlike ATYCLB... U2 doesn't ever make the same record twice in a row anyway.