What if: POP released Nov.`96 and HTDAAB released Mar. `05

[Saracene]

The bottom line is, AB sold on the strength of the songs like One, Mysterious Ways, etc. There was a reason why One got released as a single and not Love is Blindness. To say that U2 didn't need radio-friendly, accessible songs with AB is just preposterous.

 

[namkcuR]

The bottom line is, AB sold on the strength of the songs like One, Mysterious Ways, etc. There was a reason why One got released as a single and not Love is Blindness. To say that U2 didn't need radio-friendly, accessible songs with AB is just preposterous.

I disagree, but I don't feel like arguing this point out. It's not even the main arguement of the thread. However, I will say that even the radio-friendly tracks from AB like One and Mysterious Ways are the most deep and obscure tracks in the world when compared to Stuck In A Moment or Elevation.

 

[jick]

Ok this thread has veered so far off-topic I'd like to declare it dead or useless. Everyone is talking why POP did not click and all. What I just wanted is your opinion if overall sales would have been different had it been released on a different date.

Cheers,

J

 

[gabriele1971]

finally a very good thread!!!! this is what really makes Interference awesome.
the main reason for which Pop didn't sell very well is wrong marketing, lack of promotion and of communication.
you have to understand that POP was the first U2 album really PLANNED since AB. Zooropa was an offspring of AB, Passengers was an experimental thing with Eno.
so, it was a 5-yr plus break between the 2. in those 5 yrs, things had changed a lot in the biz. grunge had come and gone; new punk had come and gone; REM became the biggest band in the world (from 92 to 95), and so on.
clearly U2 thought that releasing the record and going on tour was enough to sell the album and the tour, but of course it wasn't so. in fact, when they found out the album and the tour weren't selling, they desperatly tried to push it (played an award TV show in Germany in August, played the 2 MTV awards, the Sarajevo gig went live on radio etc...). but it didn't work.
of course, another big problem was the lack of singles. the most radio-friendly track was Staring, which had moderate success, but the following singles (Last Night, Please, If God, Mofo) just BOMBED.
another factor was the media PR. all the word's press came to the first show in Vegas, it sucked, all the press wrote it; some shows sold badly, all the press jumped on it; so the whole era was surrounded by very bad press.
so, of course, the next time around they planned things very well. they started PROMOTING the album in september 2000 (Top Of The Pops on the Dublin roof) and stopped in february 2002 (Grammy-Suberbowl). in between, there was an helluva of things: promo shows, TV awards, the tour, NBA, TV shows, DVD, etc... it was an 18 month plan which worked wonders. as Bono said "the secret is to last 2 Xmas's". it put U2 back on track as a BIG BAND, especially in North Am (the biggest market in the world). they're still cashing on it now, 4 yrs on.
of course, all of that has nothing to do with the artistic side of it. in fact, I think Pop is much better that its follower...we're talking bucks here!!!!!!!

 

[Hewson]

Well Jick, we need some more specifics...what day in November 1996?
If Pop were released Nov 17, it would have sold 11.6 million its first week, however if it were released Nov 26, it would have only had total sales of 412,221, and if it were released Nov. 31, it would have sold zero.
If the queen had balls she'd be king.
Cheers,
H.

 

[BigMacPhisto]

Pop had a bajillion singles........and radio only liked two of them (and I only heard "Staring At The Sun" a lot on my local station)......the album just didn't have the strong songs to sell it. There's things they could've done differently to promote it, but most people just didn't like the music.

 

[Pero]

Whatever, if Pop was released two months ago, it would still be the same: GREAT

 

[Pero]

I repeat myself too much lately: Shut up- Pop is better than ATYCLB 11111100000000000000000 times and is equal to HTDAAB, and in the same time is better than any 80's album except JT

 

[Lancemc]

Well Jick, we need some more specifics...what day in November 1996?
If Pop were released Nov 17, it would have sold 11.6 million its first week, however if it were released Nov 26, it would have only had total sales of 412,221, and if it were released Nov. 31, it would have sold zero.
If the queen had balls she'd be king.
Cheers,
H.

*laughing uncontrollably*...oh wait, no I'm not.

 

[david]

Promotion? Lets face it, U2 Had to promote ATYCLB and HTDAAB because of the failure of Pop. Where were the Pre shows for Achtung Baby?

They really didn't need to do any pre shows in 1991 for Achtung Baby. Achtung Baby came out in the fall of 1991, It was just in Jan of 1990 that U2 were still actively touring as a band for the Love Town tour and wrapping up that phase and era of the band. They really didn't go away back then like they did from 1993 until Fall of 1996. They just went away to record a new album and think of a new direction for the band.

You also have to take into consideration that in 1991 U2 were still a "young" hot act and Achtung Baby was the follow up to their first break-through album being The Joshua Tree (Rattle and Hum was more or a less a companion album and a soundtrack so I don't think it would be considered a follow up).

By 1996 things were different, U2 was an established veteran act by this point and the mainstream musical landscape really was changing in 96 and 97. They were trying to adopt techno but that was just a passing fad in the mainstream music world. Prodigy, Chemical Bros etc they had a few hits but it never stuck here in the US. Also SKA was really popular here and the Spice Girls ruled the world and boy bands were just starting to emerge for the first time since New Kids on The Block. It was just a horrible time for music here in the US and U2 suffered because they were kind of lost amongst that.

Pop wasn't and isn't a bad album, it was just bad timing when it was released. I think if U2 had it finished and ready to go in early 1996 or even late 1995 for that matter it would have done really well because then it would have sounded different from everything else.

Part of what made U2 a sucessful act was being ahead of their time and doing things musically that no one else did.. But when Pop came out they were dabbling in what was popular at the time, so it just didn't seem all that special to people I guess.

 

[LMP]

Alot of ppl are just focusing on Pop, and not talking bout HTDAAB that much at all, if ne

Like many have stated earlier, if Pop had more time, and was more "complete" like the band wanted *and spared us those 'best of' mixes* it would've sold more, not the amount Joshua Tree sold, but probably the same about Zooropa sold.

Now the main reason they went 'back to basics' w/ ATYCLB was because of the mistakes they had learned from Pop, and the extremely radical changes they had made in the 90s. Either way, U2 would've made a transition back into their "old style" of music, just that ATYCLB would've been subtley different, more of an infusion of the 90s U2 and 80s U2 that more people expected.

With HTDAAB however, it got tons of hype because in the 4 year break and how over that time, the taste of the album soured for most and people wanted a more raw Boy/October/War sound on steriods and something hard like punk rock on Venus

But I think that HTDAAB wouldn't have tried to be a departure from ATYCLB AND Pop, it would've been in more of the vein of the previous 80s/90s hybrid album that i mentioned before. So in effect, the post-2000 albums would be similar and not one more user-friendly album and a harder, rockier album.

The sales I think for the Parallel Dimension HTDAAB would probably be around the same as the current HTDAAB is now, it just would take a little longer because of the lack of a the holiday push