So I've heard the new U2 album on Q104.3

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

Theu2kid2k

Babyface
Joined
Aug 26, 2000
Messages
9
Location
Queens, NY
So I heard this thing legit, on the radio, free of commercial last night 11/14/04. Before I say the next statement let me make a little disclaimer. I LOVE U2, I think they're the best band since Jesus Christ was a super star...With that said, I must sadly post that, this album is crap. I'm so dissapointed with how slow and aimless it is. Its like Metallica's St.Anger in that it lacks direction and inspiration. Of course I'm going to buy it, but that's neither here nor there considering my brain won't let me NOT buy something U2.

sigh

The Kid
 
look man, er lady, believe me i was listening quite intently. I'm a musician, it's what I.........oh screw it, you guys will think what you want to.
 
Phaser is a musician that gave a review of the album after one listen after being given a chance to preview it at a Dutch interscope records preview. He originally hated it and gave it 3 stars. Now, after listening to it a few more times, he upgraded his review to a 9....That is why they said ask Phaser. You have your opinion, I..after hearing it several times...just disagree.
 
Hey, I was just trying to give you some hope that maybe on the 2,3 or 4th listen you might actually like it.

Personally, I was scared on my first listen. But I kept listening and one by one the beauty of each song began to hit me.

No need to get pissed, relax.
 
I don't know why people think that just because they're a musician, it means that they have better taste. That's bull.

Give the album a chance (or don't, no skin off my apple), but don't go throwing around this "I'm a musician" crap.

I'm a musician, also, but it doesn't make me feel that my opinion is more important.
 
chances are it'll grow on you - I hated it when I first heard it, and while I am still a little disappointed, I like it alot more now after a few (hundred ;) ) more listens.
 
Like Metallica's St. Anger this album needs to be listened a few times to take it all in. The you'll see the genius of it. :up: However I do think that the tracklist doesn't help. :down:
 
this album didn't need to "grow" for me....i saw the merits of it the first time i listened to it. the only thing that has grown is my love for it.

i was worried because it wasn't a "grower." ....but it see new depths every time i listen.
 
I apologize. I don't mean to wear the musician on my sleeve. What I meant to say is that having been trained in guitar,piano,bass and drums and being in the biz for a while, I have an idea what can be done in a studio and what requires a great deal of work and what doesn't. if you have a lot going for you musically as far as new and raw material is concerned there isn't that much work needed on the producers behalf. But I imagine with having so many producers on hand, what we have here is a case of too many chefs. I also thought that the recording quality is a bit dodgey. There were quite a few times when I found bono to me almost unaudible. For a project costing so much cash, it's a wonder why things aren't sharper... U2 sound or what have you, I can't really say. My other gripe is that bono's lyrics didn't really um grab me? Vocally speaking it was a bit underdone, not much in the way of anything hookey or what have you. I guess the fact that the album plays so slowly is what gets me. All this hype about what a career defining, most rock that u2 has ever done kind of album has me a bit looking for more. More fast paced tracks, like maybe 2? Bono said U2 paint with all the colors of the rainbow... he was obviously not thinking this when he painted Bomb. I miss edge, like Even better than the, the fly, mysterious. A sound that made me jump up with joy. Maybe i'm showing my age, and maybe i'm lacking culture, but I don't get it. An album to show off rock, that's stripped down, yet turns out to be slow and moody. I guess to sum it all up, I feel duped. They sold one thing, but when you opened the box you got something else entirely different.

Thank god for Vertigo
 
Theu2kid2k said:
So I heard this thing legit, on the radio, free of commercial last night 11/14/04. Before I say the next statement let me make a little disclaimer. I LOVE U2, I think they're the best band since Jesus Christ was a super star...With that said, I must sadly post that, this album is crap. I'm so dissapointed with how slow and aimless it is. Its like Metallica's St.Anger in that it lacks direction and inspiration. Of course I'm going to buy it, but that's neither here nor there considering my brain won't let me NOT buy something U2.

sigh

The Kid

Out of all the people I have told to get their hearing checked, you need to visit a specialist the fastest. Go make an appointment now! There's something seriously wrong with your ears. This thing puts everything U2 have made since the eighties to shame.
 
The version the radio stations are broadcasting is not the proper album, they are the same things we have, I know this because I called my local station who played the album last night and they told be it was a ripped bootleg.

Add to that the compression of FM radio and you should know already, as a musician, that you aren't hearing it properly. I essentially agree with you about the production, it's my #2 gripe behind the exclusion of Mercy. I just wish they would let the songs 'breathe' more. BUt that's the nature of the digital age. Literally NO bands are doing it. And if they are, they are using masks.

What do you hear in Vertigo that you wish the rest of the album had? Power chords? It's the same lyrical style as the rest of the album. It's short, lacks a guitar solo, it's catchy, it's melodic rock.

It's just fuckign melodic rock, it's not supposed to be anything else. Achtung Baby was the same, it's just the band had a different image. It fools people, I guess.
 
Re: Re: So I've heard the new U2 album on Q104.3

Axver said:


Out of all the people I have told to get their hearing checked, you need to visit a specialist the fastest. Go make an appointment now! There's something seriously wrong with your ears. This thing puts everything U2 have made since the eighties to shame.

That quote is just too bombastic.

Good album? Yes.

Great album? Tough to tell after a week. I think it just misses. To say it's better than Achtung Baby may be your opinion, but not one that the majority of people are going to agree with.
 
C'mon Ax, be realistic. I know it's just your opinion and all, but that's all we do on this board is give opinions.

It's a very good album. But to add to your argument that it puts the things they've done since the 80's to shame is laughable.
The Joshua Tree is 17 years old and STILL gets heaps of praise. This album is not even OUT yet.

Also, people said the same thing about ATYCLB, it's only been 4 years and we know that "emotion" didn't stand the test of time.
 
Re: Re: Re: So I've heard the new U2 album on Q104.3

teebee said:


That quote is just too bombastic.

Good album? Yes.

Great album? Tough to tell after a week. I think it just misses. To say it's better than Achtung Baby may be your opinion, but not one that the majority of people are going to agree with.

I don't really expect many people to agree with me, and what's more, I haven't made this judgement rashly. It took at least a year for me to decide that The Unforgettable Fire was the best album U2 had ever made when I first seriously got into the band, and this album quite clearly tops everything in UF.

Anyhow, I could say a lot more, but I don't want to deviate too far off topic into a discussion of the merits of Achtung Baby.
 
Theu2kid2k said:
I apologize. I don't mean to wear the musician on my sleeve. What I meant to say is that having been trained in guitar,piano,bass and drums and being in the biz for a while, I have an idea what can be done in a studio and what requires a great deal of work and what doesn't. if you have a lot going for you musically as far as new and raw material is concerned there isn't that much work needed on the producers behalf. But I imagine with having so many producers on hand, what we have here is a case of too many chefs. I also thought that the recording quality is a bit dodgey. There were quite a few times when I found bono to me almost unaudible. For a project costing so much cash, it's a wonder why things aren't sharper... U2 sound or what have you, I can't really say. My other gripe is that bono's lyrics didn't really um grab me? Vocally speaking it was a bit underdone, not much in the way of anything hookey or what have you. I guess the fact that the album plays so slowly is what gets me. All this hype about what a career defining, most rock that u2 has ever done kind of album has me a bit looking for more. More fast paced tracks, like maybe 2? Bono said U2 paint with all the colors of the rainbow... he was obviously not thinking this when he painted Bomb. I miss edge, like Even better than the, the fly, mysterious. A sound that made me jump up with joy. Maybe i'm showing my age, and maybe i'm lacking culture, but I don't get it. An album to show off rock, that's stripped down, yet turns out to be slow and moody. I guess to sum it all up, I feel duped. They sold one thing, but when you opened the box you got something else entirely different.

Thank god for Vertigo

While not an all-out rock album, I don't understand how people can say it is full of slow, moody songs. Vertigo, All Because of You, Love and Peace, and City of Blinding are all either heavy, fast or both. In addition, while certainly not rockers, Miracle Drug and Crumbs from Your Table both go well beyond slow, ballad territory. It is just a well rounded album overall in terms of fast/slow, heavy/soft, etc. Not saying you have to like it, but calling it a slow album just makes no sense.
 
U2DMfan said:
C'mon Ax, be realistic. I know it's just your opinion and all, but that's all we do on this board is give opinions.

It's a very good album. But to add to your argument that it puts the things they've done since the 80's to shame is laughable.
The Joshua Tree is 17 years old and STILL gets heaps of praise. This album is not even OUT yet.

Also, people said the same thing about ATYCLB, it's only been 4 years and we know that "emotion" didn't stand the test of time.

I realise my opinion's not very popular, but it's just that I'm not keen on nineties U2 as much as I am on eighties U2 (don't get me wrong, though - anyone who reads my LiveJournal would have seen all the praise I recently placed upon Zooropa). HTDAAB is a style of U2 that I like a lot more than what appeared on AB, Zooropa, and Pop, and I've always found ATYCLB to be weak, so for me, it's not laughable at all to say this is the best album since the eighties.
 
Well has i have said a million times this week i LOVE HTDAAB!!...and each person is allowed his or her own opinion...if you don't like it well thats up to you, but don't give up on it yet,has people have said it will for surely grow on you song by song lyric by lyric...U2 has that effect on people :dance:
 
U2DMfan said:

The Joshua Tree is 17 years old and STILL gets heaps of praise. This album is not even OUT yet.

I think before we DO get too deep into the merits of this album compared to others I think we still need to give it time. Months and maybe even a year before any deep conclutions are made. I mean the album ISNT EVEN OUT YET, like U2DMfan said. I know it's fun to argue, well maybe discuss is the better word, about this album vs. that one, but I think it would be in everyone's best interest to do so with caution.
 
Theu2kid2k said:
I apologize. I don't mean to wear the musician on my sleeve. What I meant to say is that having been trained in guitar,piano,bass and drums and being in the biz for a while, I have an idea what can be done in a studio and what requires a great deal of work and what doesn't. if you have a lot going for you musically as far as new and raw material is concerned there isn't that much work needed on the producers behalf. But I imagine with having so many producers on hand, what we have here is a case of too many chefs. I also thought that the recording quality is a bit dodgey. There were quite a few times when I found bono to me almost unaudible. For a project costing so much cash, it's a wonder why things aren't sharper... U2 sound or what have you, I can't really say. My other gripe is that bono's lyrics didn't really um grab me? Vocally speaking it was a bit underdone, not much in the way of anything hookey or what have you. I guess the fact that the album plays so slowly is what gets me. All this hype about what a career defining, most rock that u2 has ever done kind of album has me a bit looking for more. More fast paced tracks, like maybe 2? Bono said U2 paint with all the colors of the rainbow... he was obviously not thinking this when he painted Bomb. I miss edge, like Even better than the, the fly, mysterious. A sound that made me jump up with joy. Maybe i'm showing my age, and maybe i'm lacking culture, but I don't get it. An album to show off rock, that's stripped down, yet turns out to be slow and moody. I guess to sum it all up, I feel duped. They sold one thing, but when you opened the box you got something else entirely different.

Thank god for Vertigo
I kinda felt like this too in the very beginning. Once you loose the "rock album" idea you start enjoying it a lot more, it really has some very good quality rock n' roll in it but I too expected more. Some songs there are among their best in my opinion like City of Blinding Lights and Love And Peace Or Else. However I think Edge tends to constrain his guitar too much, like Lillywhite said to him, he should just let it loose.

I really think The Edge has the wrong idea of some harder rock, he always tends to name bands like BonJovi and recently Whitensake as harder rock. I think he associates that style with that horrible poser attitude and stupid pop songwriting form some of those 80’s bands. He is in an urgent need of listening to some other bands that don’t go down the same road and have a more honest approach to harder rock n’ roll with the right attitude and that can make music of much better quality.

The looseness of Mercy sometimes appears on the album but it should be there more often I think. Some songs feel too planned at times for me. But still, once you get into it the album really shines, there’s some VERY good moments there and Vertigo is a great opener but it's like that other U2 song says "a promise on the year of election", it really doesn't represent what the album is all about at all. I think listening to Zoo Station or even The Fly you could get a better idea of what to expect, Vertigo on the other hand promises something it doesn't FULLY deliver.
 
Yeah BrazilFly, Vertigo probably DID represent the general sound of the album until Chris Thomas left..it, ABOY and LAPOE seem to be the only survivors of the "rock" album.
 
Sleep Over Jack said:
Yeah BrazilFly, Vertigo probably DID represent the general sound of the album until Chris Thomas left..it, ABOY and LAPOE seem to be the only survivors of the "rock" album.

Maybe you're right. :shrug:


I really wish we could listen to those songs, I'm not saying they are better than what we got here but just for curiosty.
 
I think, when it takes all four long years of hard working so that every member of the band has already listened to every track (and all its variations) thousands of times, there's no chance of getting it just after one listening. When they were creating and producing Bomb, track after track, they had themselves treated songs like long konown friends, so to hear the bomb the way it was meant to needs more engagment than just one radio broadcast (interrupted by preparing dinner:). Try to hear the way Edge did at the beginning of that year, for instance. Listen to Bomb few more times-give it a chance!!!
 
Re: Re: So I've heard the new U2 album on Q104.3

Axver said:


This thing puts everything U2 have made since the eighties to shame.

i don't know what you're smoking, but i want some!
 
Back
Top Bottom