Are you under the impression that U2 is obsessed with the idea

[U2_Guy]

of making "the best U2 album ever" and trying to be the best selling band, the one that can still appeal to the masses no matter what?

99% of interferencers will tell me now: "U2 trying to make the best album they ever done and trying to sell zillions of records isn't a bad thing, are you crazy, U2_Guy, you Jick's sidekick!"

Well kids. It would not be a bad thing... if it came naturally. But it isn't coming naturally.

U2 could have released this album last year in october as we read here. But they had to remake it over and over... In the process a lot get missed...

Don't get me wrong, HTDAAB is awesome. Tons better than ATYCLB. But it sounds very much calculated to appeal to everyone, especially the american market.

Everytime (since ATYCLB) i hear Bono's saying "this record is our best collection of songs ever... now we have 11 good reasons to leave home and go touring..." it makes me go hmmmmmmm...

Sounds like the boys are trying to hard to still being "relevant" and a best selling band.

When i hear songs like Mercy i know that U2 still can do the music i want... the music i heard on every U2 album till Pop. Brave, adventurous, unafraid of being on the edge.

U2's best works came when they didn't care if an album would sell loads or nada. Unforgettable Fire was risky. Achtung Baby was DAMN risky... Zooropa too... Not to mention Passengers and Pop...

HTDAAB is awesome. But very much on the safe lane. Now i hear some saying: "Vertigo is not on the safe lane! It's punk you damn U2_Guy!" or "Love and Peace isn't safe either!". As much as i like them, i think they are safe, yes. They are the calculated "heavy" songs that U2 feel they need to have on a record to prove they can still "rock". They don't sound naturally rockers like Bullet, Exit, The Fly, UTEOTW etc. The "heavy" HTDAAB songs feel like U2 thought on studio after recording (just an example) AMAAW : "Well guys, let's make a hard tune now"...

My theory: as long as U2 keeps consciously trying to record their best record ever they will keep releasing safe albums and will NOT deliver their best record ever. They will only do it when they start to care much less for sales amount and to compete with todays bands.

 

[iota]

I've always agreed with that sentiment. "Mercy" is proof that U2 can still be delightfully sloppy, and I wish they would be. By the way, I'm soooo glad that after 10 years of no decent U2, now that U2 is finally making worthy music again, that they've decided no to give the fans too much of a good thing by putting Mercy on the album. I say too much of a good thing will make up for the dismal state of the band before this album. And you're right. They need to seriously loosen up.

 

[purpleblackeye]

perfect observations, U2 Guy. i completely agree.

i also think HTDAAB is awesome - no complaints here. but it would be cool if one day they would make an album of them "just playing in a room" (as they always used to say), a totally stripped down affair with no slick production. like the punk band they started off as. i think you would really see the essence of U2 then.

i am thankful, however, that after so many years, they can still turn out albums like HTDAAB.

 

[If you shout...]

I agree with you, U2_Guy, as I already have in a few other threads, here and there--we seem to be on comparable critical wavelengths.

I also really enjoy this new album...I think it's a lot of fun and is, for the most part, a very, very captivating listen. I have complaints, to be sure, but I still think that the album is a wonderful listen and one of the best releases of 2004.

I've said it in other threads, though, and I'll say it again here: U2 just needs to shut up and get down to business. I don't mean to sound overly critical, but that's how I feel. A cardinal rule of creative writing applies to the creation of music, as well: SHOW, DON'T TELL.

U2 needs to stop TELLING us that they're making the greatest album ever and just fucking MAKE the damn thing! I'm sorry, but I just don't see this album being that album...there's absolutely no way. Either way, instead of trying to CONVINCE everybody how great they are and how great their music is, I want the band to just SHOW us how great that music is and how great they really are. Stop talking about it and JUST DO IT--Nike style.

 

[joaoricardo]

YOU DO NOT MAKE ANY SENSE AT ALL. U2 JUST MAKE THERE BEST ALBUM EVER! NEVER HAVE PLAYED BETTER AS MUSICIANS.IT'A OVER PRODUCED? MAYBE BUT WE NEVER KNOW HOW THIS MUSICS SOUND WITHOUT THIS PRODUCTION AND WE ARE IN 2004 THEY HAVE TOO USE THETECNOLOGY AVAIBLE NOW AND NOT TO GO TO THE PAST. I THINK YOU ARE IN THE PAST AND YOU HAVE THE RIGTH TO BE THERE, JUSTA SATY THERE BUT DO NOT WANT U2 AND ALL US TO BE THERE TOO. IT'S YOUR CHOICE

 

[U2_Guy]

YOU DO NOT MAKE ANY SENSE AT ALL. U2 JUST MAKE THERE BEST ALBUM EVER! NEVER HAVE PLAYED BETTER AS MUSICIANS.IT'A OVER PRODUCED? MAYBE BUT WE NEVER KNOW HOW THIS MUSICS SOUND WITHOUT THIS PRODUCTION AND WE ARE IN 2004 THEY HAVE TOO USE THETECNOLOGY AVAIBLE NOW AND NOT TO GO TO THE PAST. I THINK YOU ARE IN THE PAST AND YOU HAVE THE RIGTH TO BE THERE, JUSTA SATY THERE BUT DO NOT WANT U2 AND ALL US TO BE THERE TOO. IT'S YOUR CHOICE

Cut the caps. Falou meu?

 

[Jamila]

I agree with the contention that IF U2 is trying to stick with a tried and true method of success in making their contemporary music, they MAY never find the road that leads to their "best" album.

My questions though are:

who defines their "best" album and how is that decision reached?

and

has anyone simply entertained the idea that as U2 has matured (they are old enough to be some posters' fathers) that their taste in the music they make may be changing?

I am u2's age and I will tell you that I am more attracted to the sort of music that U2 is making nowadays - more structured medium tempo Rock music with a few big ballads - than I am with the music that I find on MTV2.

So, maybe their "growing older" has something with the choices of Rock music that they're making today....or maybe not.

Anyway, I will stay close to U2 and their music in the future as I have done since "Boy".

Simply put, I WILL FOLLOW....and I will cherish and enjoy U2.

 

[If you shout...]

Jamila, you raise several good points.

You're very right to question just who it is that determines which album is U2's best. The answer, of course, is that there IS no answer. Everybody decides the band's best album for him or herself, just as that same person needs to decide what the best albums from other bands' catalogues is. That said, I can say that All That You Can't Leave Behind is a pile of shit just as validly as someone else can say that it's a masterpiece--granted, I'll think that latter person a bit insane, but he or she is still correct for him- or herself.

Additionally, I think that you are VERY correct in your assessment of the band getting older and shifting their tastes. You used the term "matured," and I think it's important to denote that maturity as being one of years, not necessarily taste-wise or in terms of intellect. The band may well becoming smarter as a group with age, but I think it's dangerous to attatch either overtly positive or overtly negative connotations to a word like "matured." The band has grown...it's up to each individual person to decide just what KIND of growth that was.

I do think that their tastes are getting tamer, regardless of whether or not one sees that as a good thing. Just look to their opening acts for evidence of this:

Zoo TV: The Pixies, Pearl Jam, The Velvet Underground (regardless of how you may feel about them, some of the most important bands of the last forty years and also some of the most challenging and difficult)

Elevation/Next Tour: A washed-up PJ Harvey, Nelly Furtado, Scissor Sisters, Garbage, No Doubt (pretty safe, predictable rock...not necessarily bad, but certainly nothing forward-thinking or avant-garde)

So there it is. Right...?

 

[Like someone to blame]

I agree with U2 Guy. My buddy and I have been HUGE U2 fans since the War album and we have both been somewhat dissapointed in the albums since Zooropa. When I say "disappointed" I mean in the context that the albums just seem to be so calculated to appeal to the very "pop kids" Bono used to rail against during the late 80's thru AB era. In other words, the albums to me have been meticulously crafted to appeal to the mass record buying public of "pop kids" and the listeners of Adult Contempory formatted music. In other words, today's U2 is not your father's U2! The U2 I and many others here grew up with didn't purposely produce albums (imo) to appeal to every Tom, Dick, and Harry. Now, they do and it is so obvious.

All that aside, they have crafted some wonderful songs since Zooropa and I actually don't begrudge the band for evolving their attitudes in regards to the mass appeal of their music. One thing the band has been consistent on from day one is their desire to be one of the "biggest bands in the world" and you certainly don't get their by making eclectic music that only appeals to a handful of music listeners. It's just that where in the past it may not have been so blatantly obvious and calculated today it is. The band certainly wants to leave it's mark (we all know they have regardless) on music history and hence I believe that desire has ultimately led to "safe" radio friendly albums since Zooropa. Of course, money comes into the equation here at some point and U2 are shrewd businessmen...make no mistake about that...but I don't personally believe money is their ultimate motivater in all this.

But, if I could play devil's advocate here and perhaps even second guess my statements from my opening paragraph. One could argue in their case that when they started out, they lacked any sort of formal music education and really relied on sheer youthful exhuberance to create songs...thereby giving way to the rawer, more garage sounding albums. As the band has matured in it's craft and no doubt gained more formal musicianship skills, it would appear that the more "produced, safe" songs post Zooropa could simply be the result of the maturation and evolution of a band's musical skills devolping over 20+ years and less of a calculated effort to simply produce radio friendly hits. Also, to what extent does their age play into the songs we are hearing? Does one truly "rock out" in their early to middle forties anymore? Can you actually imagine U2 putting out an album today of 11 up-tempo all-out rockers along the lines of Vertigo?

U2 is awesome...I feel the best ever. HTDAAB is incredible...whether or not the "safeness" and "pop" appeal of their albums since Zooropa is a calculated effort or simply the result of the bands maturation process we may never know...I just agree with U2 Guy and others that overall the band appears to be entirely too focused on making the perfect album that appeals to the masses.

LSTB

 

[Aardvark747]

I never knew Pearl Jam supported U2?

 

[elevation]

of making "the best U2 album ever" and trying to be the best selling band, the one that can still appeal to the masses no matter what?

99% of interferencers will tell me now: "U2 trying to make the best album they ever done and trying to sell zillions of records isn't a bad thing, are you crazy, U2_Guy, you Jick's sidekick!"

Well kids. It would not be a bad thing... if it came naturally. But it isn't coming naturally.

U2 could have released this album last year in october as we read here. But they had to remake it over and over... In the process a lot get missed...

Don't get me wrong, HTDAAB is awesome. Tons better than ATYCLB. But it sounds very much calculated to appeal to everyone, especially the american market.

Everytime (since ATYCLB) i hear Bono's saying "this record is our best collection of songs ever... now we have 11 good reasons to leave home and go touring..." it makes me go hmmmmmmm...

Sounds like the boys are trying to hard to still being "relevant" and a best selling band.

When i hear songs like Mercy i know that U2 still can do the music i want... the music i heard on every U2 album till Pop. Brave, adventurous, unafraid of being on the edge.

U2's best works came when they didn't care if an album would sell loads or nada. Unforgettable Fire was risky. Achtung Baby was DAMN risky... Zooropa too... Not to mention Passengers and Pop...

HTDAAB is awesome. But very much on the safe lane. Now i hear some saying: "Vertigo is not on the safe lane! It's punk you damn U2_Guy!" or "Love and Peace isn't safe either!". As much as i like them, i think they are safe, yes. They are the calculated "heavy" songs that U2 feel they need to have on a record to prove they can still "rock". They don't sound naturally rockers like Bullet, Exit, The Fly, UTEOTW etc. The "heavy" HTDAAB songs feel like U2 thought on studio after recording (just an example) AMAAW : "Well guys, let's make a hard tune now"...

My theory: as long as U2 keeps consciously trying to record their best record ever they will keep releasing safe albums and will NOT deliver their best record ever. They will only do it when they start to care much less for sales amount and to compete with todays bands.

My thoughts exactly

 

[TheFlyOnTheWall]

U2 needs to stop TELLING us that they're making the greatest album ever and just fucking MAKE the damn thing!

Yeah, they could do that when they are capable of releasing songs like Womanfish. A VERY rocking song. It's something like God Part II or sth else from that era. And that song and the guitar on it gives me more rocking sound than few Vertigos. (Don't forget Bonos rough voice and screams)! Vertigo is just too smooth to be rock. I may even say - overproduced...

Next album they do, they shouldn't talk absolutely nothing about it, not even that they're making it. So, when the album full of Womanfish and Holy Joe's, and Feel Free (though it could use a little more production there ), then it will be their "reason" to go touring.

(I'm not saying anything bout this album, I haven't heard it, except Vertigo)

 

[believer75]

You wanted U2 to continue as a band, right?? Well, there had to be 'All That You Can't Leave Behind' to let people "behind the curtain" of what U2 stood for. That way U2 could enter into their 3rd phase and provide, YOU, the fans with more music. Most people after POP (a brilliant album IMO) were a bit confused with what U2 was about. 'All That' let people in and then the madness started all over. Be thankful for 'ATYCLB'. Don't rip it to shreds because without its success, you wouldn't have any new U2 music to complain (I mean, praise) about.

 

[oceane]

One could argue in their case that when they started out, they lacked any sort of formal music education and really relied on sheer youthful exhuberance to create songs...thereby giving way to the rawer, more garage sounding albums. As the band has matured in it's craft and no doubt gained more formal musicianship skills, it would appear that the more "produced, safe" songs post Zooropa could simply be the result of the maturation and evolution of a band's musical skills devolping over 20+ years and less of a calculated effort to simply produce radio friendly hits. Also, to what extent does their age play into the songs we are hearing? Does one truly "rock out" in their early to middle forties anymore? Can you actually imagine U2 putting out an album today of 11 up-tempo all-out rockers along the lines of Vertigo?

LSTB [/B]

I know you were playing devil's advocate, but I think that you nailed it perfectly there. U2 doesn`t produce music that is as 'spontaneous' as before, simply because they are in a different place musically. I`ve heard Bono mention on more than one occasion that he realized that in the early days there was a certain magic to their music, precisely because they did not know how to write songs and could not play their instruments all that well.

I think they only have matured musically, and you cannot expect them to make the same kind of music than 20 years ago. But they still have the passion, the fire, the emotion, and that's an astonishing achievment. Atomic Bomb is the ultimate proof of that. I just can"t believe how they can pull off something *that* good after 25 years. It's just mind-blowing, I can`t stop listening to it...

 

[bsp77]

While I do think HTDAAB is one of their best albums, I really do wish they would loosen up a little and be spontaneous. Make another Zooropa! Just go into the studio in the middle of the tour and quickly record some raw songs. I am not disappointed that the new album isn't heavier but it would be great in they would make a real, raw rock album. And maybe after that, make a mostly acoustic album, just do something different and unexpected! Music should not be so calculated.

 

[Tania]

Looking back over some press cuttings from ATYCLB and POP, etc Bono has said the same thing re "the best album they have ever made" and frankly for him to say anything else at the end of the making of a record and during the marketing of the latest album would be ridiculous.

Also, to expect him not to say anything, well, come on, we are talking about Bono here...

Personally, I can hear lots of their old stuff in this album, just little snippets here and there.

They probably could go back and make an album in the same vein as Boy or War but they have been there and done that and as people have said before they ain't teenagers any more and they are better musicians so why would they?

 

[mikal]

i've always liked the band's confidence and i believe that many of their comments are a product of pure excitement of the music they're making.

 

[Layton]

This might sound controversial, but I believe Bono (and U2 by extension) is kind of trapped by his role of Africa's savior. He knows his currency regarding that situation is U2's continuing commercial success. So I really think that when devising the so-callled perfect album the pressure is to create great 'songs' that have the potential for significant cross marketability. As one reviewer put in recently 'a continents life depends on it'.

 

[U2girl]

who defines their "best" album and how is that decision reached?

The band itself IMO.

Bono used the "our best album to date" phrase when they were recording Joshua Tree, so it's not really new.
I remember Edge saying ATYCLB has some of their best songs ever, and I read on this board Adam said it's their best album. (can't say I really read anything about Bono saying anything like that about ATYCLB though)

Appealing to the masses? Correct me if I'm wrong but U2 was pretty much pushed into the face of mainstram since 87. They're not Radiohead, so enough of this indie mentality.

I'd rather hear the band tapping into soul music or do something in the direction of MDH soundtrack than rocking out and try to adapt to the latest music craze. Age gracefully, and all that.

I'd feel kind of stupid to say "they should do something else" or "this album sucks" (as some did after U2 went "safe" even though we perfectly know they do albums in trilogies), because after 25 years, I think they know what they're doing. Also consider that even for your least favorite U2 album, they put their hearts into it.

 

[If you shout...]

I'd rather hear the band tapping into soul music or do something in the direction of MDH soundtrack than rocking out and try to adapt to the latest music craze. Age gracefully, and all that.

Yes, I do agree--I'd just like to hear something new. I know that the band did contribute SOME music to that soundtrack, but most of it just involved Bono and his cohorts outside of U2. I just wanna' be surprised, again, at the sounds the band is making. Crucify me if you all must, but I'd rather be disappointed by something unexpected than reassured with something commonplace.

 

[Layton]

On a side note regarding the band always talking up their new releases, it doesn't always happen. I remember reading a magazine article before Pop was released where it had Edge and Larry bemoaning the mixes. Edge in particular expressed how he felt that Staring at the Sun was finished wrong. I think he said that the guitar part in the first chorus was just wrong, if I remember right.

 

[U2_Guy]

Yes, I do agree--I'd just like to hear something new. I know that the band did contribute SOME music to that soundtrack, but most of it just involved Bono and his cohorts outside of U2. I just wanna' be surprised, again, at the sounds the band is making. Crucify me if you all must, but I'd rather be disappointed by something unexpected than reassured with something commonplace.

Some ppl distorts and twists what we are saying If you shout.

We don't want U2 to adapt to the latest music craze. We want U2 to get off the hook, loosen up a bit, forget the pressures and make new sounds. Even if we get disappointed as you say.

But we never get disappointed when U2's trying something new... and something new doesn't mean playing banjos or the polka ok fellows.

 

[U2girl]

We want U2 to get off the hook, loosen up a bit, forget the pressures and make new sounds. Even if we get disappointed as you say.

But we never get disappointed when U2's trying something new... and something new doesn't mean playing banjos or the polka ok fellows.

You're contradicting yourself aren't you?

ATYCLB certainly was a new sound compared to 90's U2, and it had 5 songs that sounded unlike anything they ever did. Still 90's (or should I say POP) fans said they were dissapointed.

 

[U2_Guy]

You're contradicting yourself aren't you?

ATYCLB certainly was a new sound compared to 90's U2, and it had 5 songs that sounded unlike anything they ever did. Still 90's (or should I say POP) fans said they were dissapointed.

Where are the new sounds in ATYCLB? Just tell me where.

 

[U2girl]

Beautiful day - I have never heard the kind of melody that is played during the verses from Edge before, or the "see the world in green and blue" part.

Stuck - U2 does soul.

In a little while - Soul done even better. (or is it R&B?)

Wild honey - perfectly executed, pure pop song. U2 haven't done pop songs before.

Grace - Chill out tune, not really a melody that would remind me of any of their other songs.

 

[U2_Guy]

Beautiful day - I have never heard the kind of melody that is played during the verses from Edge before, or the "see the world in green and blue" part.

Stuck - U2 does soul.

In a little while - Soul done even better. (or is it R&B?)

Wild honey - perfectly executed, pure pop song. U2 haven't done pop songs before.

Grace - Chill out tune, not really a melody that would remind me of any of their other songs.

Beautiful Day - nothing new about this one. Actually it's praised as U2's return to the "old coke sound"

Stuck - U2 does soul-pastiche. And U2 did soul b4 on I still havent found and others from the RH era.

In a little while (probably ATYCLB best song) - it's not new. Listen to some b-sides from RH era. It's old for U2.

Wild honey - U2 HAVE done many many pop songs b4: Sweetest thing being just one example.

Grace - it's a try to be ambient. It sucks. U2 did ambient loads better on UF, Zooropa, Passengers.

Sorry, but ATYCLB is nothing new.

 

[ZeroDude]

not U2 but good surely, if U2 did rap but did it well i wouldn;t complain

 

[Yahweh]

Nothing wrong with wanting to be the best band in the world...and by the way U2 have always wanted this...I have interviews from 1980 with them stating this fact....this is nothing new...and as long as they go about it the right way by making music the way it should be made I have nothing wrong with it.

 

[Folkelig]

I read an article once, where Bono said that it would be the easiest thing in the world for U2 to go and make a consept album, or something. But, as long as Bono was in the band, he would make sure they stayed within the realms of mainstream.

 

[ZeroDude]

Surely the whole point of starting a band is for you having the drive to be the best?