Taking A Break From U2/U2's Biggest Musical Weakness

[toscano]

judging by his reply yes

you mean when he said "u2 knew coldplay were selling alot of album with that kind of sound and they went for that" ?? Implies he meant earlier Coldplay to me. whatever.

 

[toscano]

well lets face it shaun you come up with the same sort of reply everytime, its not hard to judge what your going to say now is it

Irony at it's best !

 

[Zoots]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Taking A Break From U2/U2's Biggest Musical Weakness

So the way to spring new sounds on your fans is to listen to the radio the year before you release the album and try to emulate the sound of whats hip? That's called being a follower

When did I EVER say that you have to emulate whats hip on the radio in order to bring in new sounds??? <--- I'm getting the feeling I'm gonna be using this smiley a lot tonight. lol.

Whether U2 copied Firestarter or not, they still did something daring, different and away from the mainstream! and risked alienating even more fans! those that tagged on with Achtung Baby.

In contrast, there was minimal risk with the changeover from Pop to ATYCLB. I'm sure they knew that the number of fans they would lose by going back to the classic sound was nothing compared to the number they would gain! And that's what happened... their fan base is freakin huge at the moment compared to the 90s. And as a result the music suffers in part. Cos they no longer have to try too hard to release a hit album.

 

[CPTLCTYGOOFBALL]

you mean when he said "u2 knew coldplay were selling alot of album with that kind of sound and they went for that" ?? Implies he meant earlier Coldplay to me. whatever.

But "That sound" is more u2 than Coldplay. That would be like telling Robert Plant in 1988 that he's ripping off David Coverdale.

 

[toscano]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Taking A Break From U2/U2's Biggest Musical Weakness

hence why they lost alot of fans with both achtung and pop, the "core" U2 fans of old didnt like it, simple as

Oh, what a load of bollocks.

How can you say that ? Have you polled us "core fans of old" or something ?

Each tour consists of cross sections of first-timers, old farts like me who have been there from the start, '80's fans, 90's fans, newer era fans, and the casual listener.

It's the casual fan and the radio listener Pop didn't grab, hence the subsequent attempt to tailor to the masses via ATYCLB and HTDAAB.

I know many people who only went to the JT tour, or AB tour, or ATYCLB tour. People who only own JT and aB, or just JT, or only ATYCLB or HTDAAB as U2 was wallowing in mass acceptance at those times. I don't know one person who only went to Popmart or who only owns Pop. Hmmmm......

 

[xaviMF22]

mofo is more daring than anything on HTDAAB

 

[Zoots]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Taking A Break From U2/U2's Biggest Musical W

my point entirley, so why are they now only getting balmed for trying to hard when really, they should have been blamed for trying to hard in all there albums?

But... they DON'T come off as trying too hard for a hit and falling flat.. in songs like Peace On Earth & When I Look!

I love these understated songs. I wish U2's next album would be an understated low key affair instead of the heavily hyped 'screaming from the rooftops' Atomic Bomb.

 

[toscano]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Taking A Break From U2/U2's Biggest Musical Weakn

When did I EVER say that you have to emulate whats hip on the radio in order to bring in new sounds??? <--- I'm getting the feeling I'm gonna be using this smiley a lot tonight. lol.

Whether U2 copied Firestarter or not, they still did something daring, different and away from the mainstream! and risked alienating even more fans! those that tagged on with Achtung Baby.

In contrast, there was minimal risk with the changeover from Pop to ATYCLB. I'm sure they knew that the number of fans they would lose by going back to the classic sound was nothing compared to the number they would gain! And that's what happened... their fan base is freakin huge at the moment compared to the 90s. And as a result the music suffers in part. Cos they no longer have to try too hard to release a hit album.

Totally agree. They're on Autoplay right now, a sprinkling of delay, some chimes, a liberal helping of Walk On, some Electrical storm, a slow one, a poppy one and you pretty much have an album.

What went wrong during LAPOE, Fast Cars and Mercy I wonder ?

;-)

 

[Zoots]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Taking A Break From U2/U2's Biggest Musical W

They're on Autoplay right now, a sprinkling of delay, some chimes, a liberal helping of Walk On, some Electrical storm, a slow one, a poppy one and you pretty much have an album.

Exactly! Thank you.

And interesting songs like Ground Beneath & Fast Cars they didn't include on the US release.

Puzzling, really.

 

[KUEFC09U2]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Taking A Break From U2/U2's Biggest Musical Weakness

Oh, what a load of bollocks.

How can you say that ? Have you polled us "core fans of old" or something ?

Each tour consists of cross sections of first-timers, old farts like me who have been there from the start, '80's fans, 90's fans, newer era fans, and the casual listener.

It's the casual fan and the radio listener Pop didn't grab, hence the subsequent attempt to tailor to the masses via ATYCLB and HTDAAB.

I know many people who only went to the JT tour, or AB tour, or ATYCLB tour. People who only own JT and aB, or just JT, or only ATYCLB or HTDAAB as U2 was wallowing in mass acceptance at those times. I don't know one person who only went to Popmart or who only owns Pop. Hmmmm......

no its just common knowladge that alot of fans were alianated by the arrival of achtung baby, and see why just assume that atyclb and htdaab where made "just" for casual fans? where getting onto that whole whose a bigger fan than who argument here, i class myself as pretty good fan (since popmart, so maybe that means not as good as you because your older than me bla bla), and i like pretty much every album U2 have put out, and would class HTDAAB up there with the best, so what am i? a sheep? blind follower?

 

[KUEFC09U2]

mofo is more daring than anything on HTDAAB

mofo is no more daring than love and peace or else for the time, mofo wasj ust following brit pop/electro rock of the 90's IMO

 

[KUEFC09U2]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Taking A Break From U2/U2's Biggest Musical W

But... they DON'T come off as trying too hard for a hit and falling flat.. in songs like Peace On Earth & When I Look!

I love these understated songs. I wish U2's next album would be an understated low key affair instead of the heavily hyped 'screaming from the rooftops' Atomic Bomb.

but how can they be going for a "hit" if the songs i mentioned werent singles?

 

[KUEFC09U2]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Taking A Break From U2/U2's Biggest Musical Weakn

Totally agree. They're on Autoplay right now, a sprinkling of delay, some chimes, a liberal helping of Walk On, some Electrical storm, a slow one, a poppy one and you pretty much have an album.

What went wrong during LAPOE, Fast Cars and Mercy I wonder ?

;-)

hnnmmm all in your opinion, also for the record mercy is not an offical U2 song, so why count it?, cobl is better than anythign of atyclb, sycmioyo is the most heartfelt ballad since one etc, all imo of course

 

[CPTLCTYGOOFBALL]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Taking A Break From U2/U2's Biggest Musical Weakness

When did I EVER say that you have to emulate whats hip on the radio in order to bring in new sounds??? <--- I'm getting the feeling I'm gonna be using this smiley a lot tonight. lol.

Whether U2 copied Firestarter or not, they still did something daring, different and away from the mainstream!

See I guess this is where our opinions differ-I just don't see how it's so daring, different and away from the mainstream to be influenced by one of the biggest songs of the previous year.

I think the whole "experimental 90s" thing is overblown. Sure they tried some new sounds, but they did that with Rattle and Hum too, and when was the last time you heard THAT being called experimental? A song like "When love comes to Town" alienated ALOT of the fans that got into them for "I will follow" so does that mean it was risky?

U2 have always been open to other music and and have dipped their toes into tons of styles.

And I still think U2 were more followers than leaders with Pop.......

 

[vaz02]

one step closer is the more daring song u2 have done , how on earth could u2 put that on the album ? now thats daring.

Mofo was quite daring , if anything it was ahead of its time. Love and peace was quite daring for u2 , was quite hard.

 

[CPTLCTYGOOFBALL]

mofo is more daring than anything on HTDAAB

Please tell me what's "Daring" about Mofo?

 

[toscano]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Taking A Break From U2/U2's Biggest Musical W

no its just common knowladge that alot of fans were alianated by the arrival of achtung baby

And the sales/tour attendances say otherwise

"common knowledge" - The last refuge of the fact-less

 

[toscano]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Taking A Break From U2/U2's Biggest Music

also for the record mercy is not an offical U2 song, so why count it?

Bacause it was recorded during the HTDAAB sessions

What "record" are you referring to you ?

Is there an "official" list somewhere ?

It's a U2 song, Bono has said so. Maybe he should have run it by you first ?

Unless of course it's Coldplay........

 

[namkcuR]

I tried, I really tried, to stop this from becoming the same old shit. But alas, I've failed.

The forum would be better off if everybody put KUEF on their ignore lists.

 

[Zoots]

and i like pretty much every album U2 have put out, and would class HTDAAB up there with the best, so what am i? a sheep? blind follower?

Just so you know, I personally don't think you or any 00s fan is a blind follower or sheep! I don't know from who here, people get this idea. Just because our opinions differ doesn't mean either of us is right or wrong. It still makes for an interesting debate though.

I tried, I really tried, to stop this from becoming the same old shit. But alas, I've failed.

Nothing wrong with the same old argument. It's interesting as long as it remains at a civil level. You knew this would turn into THAT argument when you started this thread! Admit it!



I still don't understand why people can't simply go "Oh ok, I don't feel the same way as you about HTDAAB. I think it's a masterpiece." and leave it at that. Why start fighting by saying we're calling you sheep & blind followers etc.?

It's all opinions after all.

 

[xaviMF22]

I still don't understand why people can't simply go "Oh ok, I don't feel the same way as you about HTDAAB. I think it's a masterpiece." and leave it at that. Why start fighting by saying we're calling you sheep & blind followers etc.?

It's all opinions after all.

I agree. I think its great that people like HTDAAB, but let us discuss what we don't like it about it.
We mean no harm, just expressing our ideas.

 

[Zoots]

I agree. I think its great that people like HTDAAB, but let us discuss what we don't like it about it.
We mean no harm, just expressing our ideas.

cracking me up here!

 

[cypress]

I just read the entire long-winded original post in this thread and I 100% DISagree. First off, Bomb is a better album overall than ATYCLB. ATYCLB was essentially half an album, much like War was.

Second, U2 is not "missing" anything. They have instead evolved. It seems as though a lot of folks who complain about the last two U2 albums were also the people that think the Zooropa/Pop era were a great era in U2 music. There's nothing wrong in thinking that. But the problem is, you don't realize that people change, U2 changes and therefor the overall sound changes. If you love the Zooropa/Pop eras so much then pop in those cd's or your Pomart tape and have at it all you want.

But what I love about U2 so damn much is that they allow their music to evolve and change with them. I'm not a huge fan of the Pop/Zooropa era. But I think it was necessary for U2 to go through that process to continue their musical journey.

The band has had 5 basic eras in sounds - the early years with a raw in your face sound, the UF/Joshua Tree era with a more sophistacated sound, the Achtung Baby/Zoo TV years in which there was no one sound but was creatively fantastic, the Zooropa/Pop era with its darker, electronic sound and the current Beautiful Day/Bomb era which I have yet to totally define (it will likely take more time for me to fully define this era.. it took many years for me to define the previous eras). I am being very broad and there are exceptions but that basically covers U2's sound eras in one paragraph.

Over the years I think many fans have wanted U2 to stay in the sound era that they personally like the most. To me that was Achtung Baby/Zoo TV. For others that was Zooropa/Pop. For still others it's the UF/Joshua Tree sound. And you know what? there is probably a group of fans out there that think the current U2 sound is the best. But no matter what any of us want, U2 is going to move on and do their own thing and that's what makes them the great band they are.. in fact that is WHO they are.. they are different, unique and groundbreaking. Every era has brought with it its several excellent songs. This one is no different.. Beautiful Day, Vertigo, OOTS and for me New York, Love n Peace and COBL are all awesome tunes.

If what you or anyone else wished was for U2 to continue in dance/synth style of the 90's then guess what, there probably wouldn't be a U2 anymore. The band went down that road, did that thing and finished what they wanted to accomplish. Then they did what they've done in every other era of their existence, moved on.

I think Bomb is an excellent album. And it does NOT have one continuous sound like many have suggested in this and other threads. Vertigo, Love and Peace, and ABOY sound 180 degrees from the likes of OOTS and Crumbs. It is also not "overproduced". That is one of the most inaccurate descriptions of the album I read here. The album was produced to the degree necessary for each song to have the final sound U2 wished it to have. That's not being "overproduced", it is trying to make the finished product sound the way it is supposed to. It is what every band strives to achieve when they head into the studio to record an album. If Bomb is "overproduced" then so is every other U2 album because it's the same process they've used throughout their entire career.

One other point.. if you think the lyricism of Bono has somehow gone south for the last 5 years I suggest you read the lyrics and listen to the songs again. Lyrics on the last two albums and particularly Bomb have been excellent and exquisitely layered. Bomb reminds me a bit of Joshua Tree in that way. The same song can mean different things to different people. If anything I think Bono's ability to fit the lyrics for the songs has been getting better with age.

Bottom line.. I think a lot of fans expect U2 to somehow go back to the future and put out another JT or AB or Pop. That's not going to happen folks. They will put out the music they are best capable of puting out today. And I wouldn't want my U2 any other way.

FWIW, those of you who don't like the sound of Bomb or ATYCLB can probably rest easy. I believe U2 is ready to turn the page once again and head in a new direction. What that is or where it takes them I have no idea but I can't wait to find out what it is. That's one of the great perks of being a U2 fan... any day a new U2 album comes out I feel like a little kid on Christmas seeing that big box with his name on it and wondering what's inside. Because with U2 you never know what their music is going to sound like til you pop it into the cd player.

 

[CPTLCTYGOOFBALL]

Nicely said

 

[CPTLCTYGOOFBALL]

I tried, I really tried, to stop this from becoming the same old shit. But alas, I've failed.

The forum would be better off if everybody put KUEF on their ignore lists.

Not to be a jerk but after you said this....

"The point of the post wasn't about Bomb being calculated, it was about U2's inability to be and/or aversion to being subtle, what I percieve to be their biggest musical weakness throughout their WHOLE career, 1976-2006.
Now, before I go any further, I want to say that I do NOT want this turn into the same old damn arguement. That is NOT what this is for""

....I thought the point of the thread was your opinion on a weakness that you detected run throughout U2s career(1976-2006). That could be an interesting topic. But ,if you look back at all of your comments in this thread all it is, is you comparing U2s recent work unfavourably to their pre-2000 music



"All I'm saying is that the bigger and more epic a song is, the more complex the substance of the song has to be in order for the song to have the impact it's supposed to have. 'Oh you look so beautiful tonight' is very hollow compared to 'I will be with you again', simply because there is a hundred times as much going on behind 'I will be with you again' as there is going on behind 'oh you look so beautiful tonight'. That's what I'm getting at."


"Songs like 'New Year's Day', 'Sunday Bloody Sunday', 'The Unforgettable Fire', 'Where The Streets Have No Name', 'Bullet The Blue Sky', 'All I Want Is You', 'Until The End Of The World', 'Who's Gonna Ride Your Wild Horses', 'The Fly', 'Myseterious Ways', 'Staring At The Sun' 'Gone', and 'Please', among others, are all 'big' songs, and they are all great songs, because they all have certain level of complexity to them. They were all rock songs at their core. But in recent years, U2 have tried to make pop music instead, and simple pop music at that"

"during this break, however, I've been listening to a lot of other music, and listening to other music has made clearer for me why I am still - and likely will always be - dissatisfied with U2's most recent music, most notabely 'How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb'"

I don't think I saw one criticism about any of any pre-2000 U2 in any of your posts, so I can't see where you're coming from when you say

"The point of the post wasn't about Bomb being calculated, it was about U2's inability to be and/or aversion to being subtle, what I percieve to be their biggest musical weakness throughout their WHOLE career, 1976-2006."

Despite that disclaimer, most of your criticism in this thread is in the vein of Pre-2000> post 2000, which has been discussed a thousands times here.

Yes, this thread has a "Same old Shit" vibe about it, but if you're gonna blame others for taking it into that direction you should take some of it yourself.

 

[Ifeelnumb84]

U2 are calculated and they write hits, and they often have great albums too. The last two albums haven't been that great AS ALBUMS, but do contain some great songs in the same way that War and Rattle and Hum did.
That being said, I don't think there's anything wrong with their approach. U2 are not, in purely musical sense, the best band in the world. They are not a jam band either. They write hits in a particular style (though that style has evolved throughout the years) and that's what works for them.
If these last two albums are their worst, which may be the case (i'll wait a few years to judge), then that says a lot for this band. They are only a failure when compared to previous albums...you can't just say to them "go make another joshua tree," it doesnt work that way.
However, I do agree that in SOME cases, HTDAAB is lacking in the lyrics department. Vertigo is catchy and cool but Native Son really should have been there instead. COBL is so awesome that its crappy lyrics don't really matter. Edge, Larry and Adam carry this song, and I realize many will disagree with this.

 

[namkcuR]

I just read the entire long-winded original post in this thread and I 100% DISagree. First off, Bomb is a better album overall than ATYCLB. ATYCLB was essentially half an album, much like War was.

Second, U2 is not "missing" anything. They have instead evolved. It seems as though a lot of folks who complain about the last two U2 albums were also the people that think the Zooropa/Pop era were a great era in U2 music. There's nothing wrong in thinking that. But the problem is, you don't realize that people change, U2 changes and therefor the overall sound changes. If you love the Zooropa/Pop eras so much then pop in those cd's or your Pomart tape and have at it all you want.

But what I love about U2 so damn much is that they allow their music to evolve and change with them. I'm not a huge fan of the Pop/Zooropa era. But I think it was necessary for U2 to go through that process to continue their musical journey.

The band has had 5 basic eras in sounds - the early years with a raw in your face sound, the UF/Joshua Tree era with a more sophistacated sound, the Achtung Baby/Zoo TV years in which there was no one sound but was creatively fantastic, the Zooropa/Pop era with its darker, electronic sound and the current Beautiful Day/Bomb era which I have yet to totally define (it will likely take more time for me to fully define this era.. it took many years for me to define the previous eras). I am being very broad and there are exceptions but that basically covers U2's sound eras in one paragraph.

Over the years I think many fans have wanted U2 to stay in the sound era that they personally like the most. To me that was Achtung Baby/Zoo TV. For others that was Zooropa/Pop. For still others it's the UF/Joshua Tree sound. And you know what? there is probably a group of fans out there that think the current U2 sound is the best. But no matter what any of us want, U2 is going to move on and do their own thing and that's what makes them the great band they are.. in fact that is WHO they are.. they are different, unique and groundbreaking. Every era has brought with it its several excellent songs. This one is no different.. Beautiful Day, Vertigo, OOTS and for me New York, Love n Peace and COBL are all awesome tunes.

If what you or anyone else wished was for U2 to continue in dance/synth style of the 90's then guess what, there probably wouldn't be a U2 anymore. The band went down that road, did that thing and finished what they wanted to accomplish. Then they did what they've done in every other era of their existence, moved on.

I think Bomb is an excellent album. And it does NOT have one continuous sound like many have suggested in this and other threads. Vertigo, Love and Peace, and ABOY sound 180 degrees from the likes of OOTS and Crumbs. It is also not "overproduced". That is one of the most inaccurate descriptions of the album I read here. The album was produced to the degree necessary for each song to have the final sound U2 wished it to have. That's not being "overproduced", it is trying to make the finished product sound the way it is supposed to. It is what every band strives to achieve when they head into the studio to record an album. If Bomb is "overproduced" then so is every other U2 album because it's the same process they've used throughout their entire career.

One other point.. if you think the lyricism of Bono has somehow gone south for the last 5 years I suggest you read the lyrics and listen to the songs again. Lyrics on the last two albums and particularly Bomb have been excellent and exquisitely layered. Bomb reminds me a bit of Joshua Tree in that way. The same song can mean different things to different people. If anything I think Bono's ability to fit the lyrics for the songs has been getting better with age.

Bottom line.. I think a lot of fans expect U2 to somehow go back to the future and put out another JT or AB or Pop. That's not going to happen folks. They will put out the music they are best capable of puting out today. And I wouldn't want my U2 any other way.

FWIW, those of you who don't like the sound of Bomb or ATYCLB can probably rest easy. I believe U2 is ready to turn the page once again and head in a new direction. What that is or where it takes them I have no idea but I can't wait to find out what it is. That's one of the great perks of being a U2 fan... any day a new U2 album comes out I feel like a little kid on Christmas seeing that big box with his name on it and wondering what's inside. Because with U2 you never know what their music is going to sound like til you pop it into the cd player.

Oh my God.

You're calling MY post long-winded? LOOK AT WHAT YOU JUST WROTE!

I don't understand why people(it's not JUST you) are arguing points I NEVER made. I never said ATYCLB was better than Bomb or vice versa. I never said U2 were missing anything - I only said that they had a weakness, which I guess is something that isn't taken well in these parts. I never made these points and I don't understand why people are them seeing as I was never brought them up in the first place.

Moving on...here's a question: Do you think RHCP have an alternate version of Dani California in their vault somewhere? Obviously I can't say for sure, but I doubt it. There is likely only one version of it. This is because RHCP likely don't re-produce entire songs after they are already completed. Therein lies the story of the production problems U2 have had since even Pop in 1996-97. I really get the feeling that they're never happy with their finished product. To an extent, it's always been like that, but it feels like it's getting worse and worse. Extreme perfectionism is a double-edged sword.

Finally, I'm not going to back down on my feeling that all of the songs on Bomb are of one musical mindset. Vertigo, ABOY, and LAPOE come from the same place as OOTS, COBL, and Sometimes. Just because one song is a rock song and another is a ballad, doesn't mean they don't come from the same place. LAPOE and OOTS are different shades of the same color. That kind of thing. This is, of course, all in my opinion.

 

[U2DMfan]

It is also not "overproduced". That is one of the most inaccurate descriptions of the album I read here. The album was produced to the degree necessary for each song to have the final sound U2 wished it to have. That's not being "overproduced", it is trying to make the finished product sound the way it is supposed to. It is what every band strives to achieve when they head into the studio to record an album. If Bomb is "overproduced" then so is every other U2 album because it's the same process they've used throughout their entire career.

The end doesn't always justify the means.

It's a simple premise. You can take any idea, any song, any painting, any sculpture and just rework it and rework it, rerecord it, repaint it, redraw it, rethink it to the point where whatever spark of creativity, melody, hook, riff, image, landscape, plotline is obscured in the end result because you didn't know when to take the foot off the gas pedal.

It doesn't take an extensive knowledge of musical production to understand this, they spent too long in the studio, heard themselves for too long and couldn't seperate their own best bits from the actual best bits or the latest, it was part of the reason for bringing in Lillywhite, fresh ears. A musician is often his or her own worst critic so you have to turn it over to others, sometimes they let you down, it is certainly not always the same process with the same result.

In fact, there aren't many bands who use more revisionist history than U2, in terms of re-recording old tracks. It's because both they probably want to do something different in the song's actual mechanics and they don't like how the song was presented in the first place, which could be because of over-production or under-production or just plain ol' shitty production. The bottom line is, the process they use everytime doesn't always work, just ask them, they'll tell ya.

 

[bathiu]

Please tell me what's "Daring" about Mofo?

Looking for to save my save my soul
Looking in the places where no flowers grow
Looking for to fill that God shaped hole
Mother... mother sucking rock and roll, mother...

Holy dunc, spacejunk coming in for the splash
(Been around the back... been around the front)
Wh-wh-white dopes on punk s-staring into the flash
(Been around the back... been around the front)
Looking for the baby Jesus under the trash
(Been around the back... been around the front)

Mother... mother sucking rock and roll, mother...
Bubble popping, sugar dropping, rock and roll, mother...

Mother... mother... mother...
Mother... mother... mother...

Mother... am I still your son
You know I've waited for so long to hear you say so
Mother... you left and made me someone
Now I'm still a child, no one tells me no

Looking for a sound that's going to drown out the world
(Been around the back... been around the front)
Looking for the father of my two little girls
(Been around the back... been around the front)
Got the swing, got the sway, got my straw in lemonade
(Been around the back... been around the front)
Still looking for the face I had before the world was made
(Been around the back... been around the front)

Mother... mother sucking rock and roll, mother...
Hopping popping shopping dropping, it's rock and roll, mother...
Mother... mother suck, yeah, fuck yeah, mother...

Mother... mother... mother...
Mother... mother... mother...

Soothe me mother
Rule me father
Fool me brother
Woo me sister
Soothe me mother
Rule me father
Show me mother
Show me mother
Show me mother
Show me mother
Show me mother
Show me mother

 

[U2DMfan]

mofo is no more daring than love and peace or else for the time, mofo wasj ust following brit pop/electro rock of the 90's IMO

I'm not sure of the context of anyone who uses this "Pop was the answer to the Chemical Brothers etc" type comparisons. It seems like people are just parroting the same thing over and over.

The influx of electronics into rock started long before that shit.
Head Like A Hole/Pretty Hate Machine came out in 1989, and that was just when it hit the mansitream. Skinny Puppy, KMFMDM, countless others had been doing this bit, Ministry since the early 80's.

If anything Achtung Baby was U2's first delving into the Euro-dance scence of the time. POP was just an extension of whatever started in Berlin in 1990, dance remixes by Oakenfold, Zooropa, Passengers, all of this started before POP ever materialized.

But it doesn't make such a good 'talking point' when you'd have to deride Achtung Baby for jumping on a bandwagon. Pop was decidedly more rock and roll than it's detractors will ever let on, but toss in some loops, synths and a drum machine and all of a sudden U2 are trying to capatilize on the Euro-dance scene. It makes no sense, if anything they incorporated these sonics in 1990 and started the ball rolling and stayed on board for 8 years.
In fact Massive Attack started the Bristol scene (into the mainstream( in 1991, as U2 had already been recording Achtung Baby and going to dance clubs trying to reinvigorate their version of rock and roll.

But when it comes to POP, it has to be about the bandwagon, there is no merit to this. I'll give you the chronology to denounce this garabage when I have more time. I think U2 did incorporate some trip-hop and some of that Bristol sound, whatever you want to call it into Pop, but they were already there, when Tricky and the Chemical Brothers were doing their first albums, U2 were doing Passengers, they were on board before the real commercial "explosion", (which never happened), happened. Zooropa predated Bjork's debut (or virtually the same time) Underworld was around the same time.

Bottom line, U2 had already entered electronica rock before Pop was a dream in their overzealous mind. Saying Mofo was trying to be techno bandwagon in 1997 doesn't make any sense, they were on the techno bandwagon when I got the EBTTRT single with eleventy hundred remixes on it, 5 years prior. Probably before that, in the genesis of AChtung, in the books on the band, they all talk about U2 and dance culture, long before Pop materialized. This, my friend is one big fat myth.