Has U2 Peaked?

[cobl04]

I want to echo the comments about the major upheaval in the way music is consumed these days, which I think is a major factor in U2's popularity and the public's perception of the band's music as "relevant."

Single track downloads have shifted the burden on the artist to create pre-packaged hits. No longer can a great single simply co-exist on its own amongst like-minded tracks on an album. That experience for the majority of music fans is now mostly a la carte, with iPods filled with a host of songs from different artists.

NLOTH was a great album as a whole, with some standout tracks and one or two clunkers, but there was no "Beautiful Day" on it or a "Vertigo," which U2 definitely tried to recreate in "Get on Your Boots." Without a hit single that can dominate radio, which also is favoring less rock these days and more pop, you're lacking that gateway to get younger people interested in U2. "GOYB" probably had about two months of play on the majority of Chicago radio stations before it disappeared, and not a single other track from NLOTH ever appeared on a station other than XRT, which is Chicago's more eclectic and less mainstream rock station.

Hell, I was at Lollapalooza this past weekend in Chicago, and you could feel the air deflate from the crowd when certain bands would play tracks from their albums that were lesser known. MGMT was a prime example of this. The second-to-last-song during their set was "Kids," a bona fide hit. By the time they started playing their closing tune "Congratulations," an admittedly great song, the majority of the crowd was uninterested or streaming toward the exits as if to say, "You gave us what we wanted...whatever you have left in the tank is irrelevant." Hell, you can feel the seismic shift when most fans would rather hold their cameras and cell phones in the air to record the experience to relive later at home on a small screen than give in to the moment and be fully present and allow the band to take them to great places. The whole process feels more like a transaction these days than an experience.

Part of the reason I think the U2360 set list feels like a greatest hits tour forsome people is that when average fans plunk down $100 on average to see a show they feel like they should get their moneys worth and consume their music the way they would on their own iPod. For many casual fans of U2 that means they better play "Pride" or "Vertigo" or "Beautiful Day." While I got giddy watching them play "Your Blue Room," a large portion of the crowd was lost and wondering when was the next time U2 was going to pull out a warhorse. The band realizes this. They are trying to straddle that tricky line between innovation and satisfying ticket-buyers.

Music is changing. U2 is amazing in that they've tried to stay ahead of the curve as much as possible, and they will likely be looked upon by future generations as having achieved something that may be practically impossible to do anymore -- have a 30-plus-year career filled with more peaks than valleys.

My apologies for this rambling post. I have loved U2 from Achtung Baby, which was the first cassette I ever purchased. And I'm full prepared to follow them to wherever they take their music in the future. But the ground has shifted beneath their feet, and the band is doing the best they can to adjust.

great post, particularly what i underlined. it makes me extremely sad as a music fan that 99.9% of people these days will only stand for "the hits".

i've been to a fair few gigs now, for a number of bands that i like, but not a fanatic, so naturally i wanted to hear what i knew. but if a song i don't know is performed well then it shouldn't, and doesn't matter.

 

[mad1]

I dont see point of paying for a gig if you are going to be fussy on whats sung and what isn't.

just fuking go, and enjoy the band you love, enjoy the fuking atmosphere, come away feeling happy. no point going if you just fold your arms and say 'whats this shit!'............

LOL!

 

[65980]

Bob Dylan complained about this in 1985, in his liner-notes to the Biograph box-set. He said that people at gigs by then expected only to hear songs they'd heard the recordings of, and that audiences would no longer respond to something new.

Maybe U2 should do what Dylan did in 1979 -- garbage the entire set of hits from the previous 20+ years and go onstage playing only new songs that no one knows.

Pretty hard to do in front of 55,000 people though.

 

[monsieur fly]

I'm not sure you understood mine...

Look, if anything, I think you chose a very odd time to write such a thread. I can see doing so after hearing a new album, or experiencing their latest tour, etc... But to do so when the band for the first time in over a decade has road tested new material, has several projects on the way and had(even the most negative in here have said) a pretty amazing return to form in a postponed tour seems to be bad timing.

To do so after hearing just two road tested songs?

Like I said, this thread gets written every year, and so far you may have the weakest reasoning...

It's posts like this that baffle me. BSB Bono has gone to the trouble of writing an interesting, intelligently-argued piece about U2's past and future and all you do is sneer like an East Coast intellectual (we know all about them in Britain). As it happens, I take your point that U2 have made a good start to this year's tour but that does not render BSB Bono's post irrelevant or irrational!

 

[ramblin rose]

It's posts like this that baffle me. JVD Chicago has gone to the trouble of writing an interesting, intelligently-argued piece about U2's past and future and all you do is sneer like an East Coast intellectual (we know all about them in Britain). As it happens, I take your point that U2 have made a good start to this year's tour but that does not render JVD Chicago's post irrelevant or irrational!

JVD Chicago didn't start this thread, nor did BVS sneer at JVD Chicago's very well thought out post in it, in fact, he praised it. So I'm not really understanding what you're referring to.

With regard to the original post, I still agree with BVS and a couple of other that it was misplaced in terms of timing, and maybe it's because of my longevity on this forum reading similar posts year after year that it's misplaced timing struck me a bit worse than it normally would have.

However, like I said originally, whatever. Have at it.

 

[65980]

Here's the point two of you in particular are missing -- you don't need to evaluate every thread. If you think it's "misplaced in terms of timing" (whatever the hell that means), you can ignore the thread and go elsewhere.

Obviously, both of you felt the need to comment (more than once) on this thread. Then there's the fact that it's now a 5-page thread, and a more interesting one than either of you have started in recent memory. This would seem to prove that your shared evaluation of it was dead wrong.

 

[monsieur fly]

Let me preface this by saying I have been a huge fan from the day I got into music in high school. I probably fit the prototypical U2 fanactic category to a tee so it pains me to even bring up the topic. I am 37 years old so from an age perspective I also probably fit right into the sweet spot of a U2 fan having endured the highs and lows for 2 decades. Now if the answer is yes there is nothing wrong with that as there really are not any examples of bands at this age making the best music of their lives. If it is yes though I am bit depressed by it given how much the band has meant to me and how much they have been a part of my life.

Obviously music is very subjective but I think some U2 fanatics can't step back and evaluate things rationally so that is what I have done (I think). The final straw that brought me to this conclusion was opening night in Torino a few days ago and the quality of the 2 new songs debuted. Granted we have not heard studio versions of the songs so some context is missing but what I did hear really triggered what I have been thinking for the last year now. Its also just the first real performance of each but neither to me shows potential that I need for them to grown on me. I will say I commend and thank the band for taking a real risk to debut the songs which I think has been lacking in recent years.

The concerning part about the new songs is the fact that the band supposively has a ton of new material in the vault between the many projects that have started, stopped, retooled, and been revisited in just the last few years. So from a logical perspective I would think to debut songs live the band would have to feel the songs were very strong and would have to be at the top half of quality of what they have been working on. To add 2new songs to a set list in the low 20's is a decent part of the show so they need to work well. Personally I just don't feel that they are or did. So maybe the material they have been working on is not up to what I am expecting. Again given their age I would not be shocked and it would be understandable but as a fanatic I have to say I am disappointed.

So that is what triggered this for me but as I said its been brewing in my mind for a while. Here are the other factors that have led me to where I am at. Again i want to reiterate if the best is behind us I understand and hold no ill will towards the band. The ride has been tremendous and if its slowing down in terms of my enjoyment I am OK with that.

1. Too many projects- I don't think the band is as focused as in prior years. They seem to be very confused on what type of music to release and I am guessing they are not all in agreement on direction which is very important for them. I think the lack of focus may be a lack of confidence and possibly not feeling that their standards in material is being met. Understandable given their personal lives and what they have achieved. But I really think they need to lock themselves away together in a room and figure it out eliminating distractions as best as possible. Hopefully that will happen during the long break between the next leg.

2. The Edge- He is my favorite and to me is the most important ingredient. His creativity is the sole of the band. For the most part I love and dislike U2 songs based on the Edge's work. Looking at the last albums post POP I would say he is not as creative or is lacking in ideas. Again understandable given age, environment, and his guitar style. It could very well be he has run out of ways to skin the cat and needs to move in a different direction. However that is kind of a no win in that I love his trademark sounds so not sure a totally new direction would help me. I am not saying everything he produces lately is not creative or lacking but rather looking at the whole body of work. I hope the band is not holding him back in some way as I really think he creativity will always be the key.

3. Commercialism- I am not one of those fans that hates commercialism or trying to appeal to the masses. If the music is really good I could care less whether I am the only one that likes it or millions do. However I feel, particularly with the opening singles released on at least the last few albums the band is trying too hard to be relevant. I don't think it is natural for them and I think it holds them back from the creativity that truly inspires me and has made them so relevant for years. NLOTH for the most part was less about this however there were some glaring exceptions. It again points to lack of focus and direction for me. They need to be focused on totally cohesive records.

4. Live Shows- The spectacle is not an issue as I enjoy the creativity and trying to expand the visual aspect. The issue I see here is the song selection and execution. They have a huge catalogue yet continue to not stray too far from the classics. Sometimes that is OK but if you are going to do that you need to play those classics with the best presentation you can. WOWY and MW to me are shadows of their former performances and maybe this points to the Edge. I don't understand why he is leaving out the awesome solos that really make these songs what they are live. There is perhaps some passion or energy missing with these performances. I don't see how anyone can argue these songs are better w/out their solos so I am really confused by it. Again this is understandable with age but why keep playing them if you can't play them to the best of their standards. Part of this could be trying to fit everything neatly into a relatively scripted show. If that is the case they need to stop trying to fit everything so tightly into a neat package as it takes away from what they are capable of.

So that is where I stand on this. I am very thankful for the band and the fact they continue to produce quality music and performances for so long. They owe me nothing at this point and perhaps they truly have lost a little over the years which again is still better than most of what is out there today. It is their band and they can do whatever they want and I will continue to keep supporting them financially. I just think age may have gotten the best of them in different ways not just physically. I know they are capable of more and I hope I am wrong in my assessment.

I think this is one of the best posts I have read on here. I disagree with you about the two new songs; I think the band has shown guts to play them and I think they work very well. Nevertheless, I would echo your concerns about U2's direction since (for argument's sake) 1997. I agree particularly with points two and four. The other day, I listened to AB, Zooropa and Pop, and I was struck by the sheer range of guitar sounds that the Edge had created. The last three albums have seen that range narrow to generic predictability. More worryingly, when he does produce interesting sounds, such as on Native Son and Mercy, the song gets jettisoned. I also agree very much with your fourth point. I have heard people argue that U2 ought to play warhorses because the masses want to hear them. I do not buy that logic for there must surely come a point when the benefits of playing familiar stuff become outweighed by the drawbacks of playing it so badly! WOWY and One have not worked for a long time and now MW is going down the shoot because the solo has gone and Larry wants to turn in into a HTDAAB song.

 

[monsieur fly]

JVD Chicago didn't start this thread, nor did BVS sneer at JVD Chicago's very well thought out post in it, in fact, he praised it. So I'm not really understanding what you're referring to.

With regard to the original post, I still agree with BVS and a couple of other that it was misplaced in terms of timing, and maybe it's because of my longevity on this forum reading similar posts year after year that it's misplaced timing struck me a bit worse than it normally would have.

However, like I said originally, whatever. Have at it.

Edited- I meant BSB Bono, at whom BVS most certainly did sneer! And it is not for you or anyone else to make judgements about timing. If people want to comment about anything U2-related, they can comment whenever they like.

 

[mikal]

Here's the point two of you in particular are missing -- you don't need to evaluate every thread. If you think it's "misplaced in terms of timing" (whatever the hell that means), you can ignore the thread and go elsewhere.

Obviously, both of you felt the need to comment (more than once) on this thread. Then there's the fact that it's now a 5-page thread, and a more interesting one than either of you have started in recent memory. This would seem to prove that your shared evaluation of it was dead wrong.

the thread is only 3 pages. stop lying.

 

[ramblin rose]

Here's the point two of you in particular are missing -- you don't need to evaluate every thread. If you think it's "misplaced in terms of timing" (whatever the hell that means), you can ignore the thread and go elsewhere.

Obviously, both of you felt the need to comment (more than once) on this thread. Then there's the fact that it's now a 5-page thread, and a more interesting one than either of you have started in recent memory. This would seem to prove that your shared evaluation of it was dead wrong.

I suggest you watch your tone.

 

[65980]

I suggest you watch your tone.

To serve what purpose?

 

[Saracene]

I don't think they're out there with the claw solely to be all money-grubbing and junk.

They probably would have made a lot more money if they didn't have the claw to lug around the world.

 

[BVS]

Obviously, both of you felt the need to comment (more than once) on this thread. Then there's the fact that it's now a 5-page thread, and a more interesting one than either of you have started in recent memory. This would seem to prove that your shared evaluation of it was dead wrong.

Wow, now we're insulting mods.

And how does the length of the thread prove anyone "wrong"?

 

[BVS]

It's posts like this that baffle me. BSB Bono has gone to the trouble of writing an interesting, intelligently-argued piece about U2's past and future and all you do is sneer like an East Coast intellectual (we know all about them in Britain). As it happens, I take your point that U2 have made a good start to this year's tour but that does not render BSB Bono's post irrelevant or irrational!

What is so "baffling" about it? Did you see my first post, did you see the context to which the second post was made?

This thread DOES get made every year(or sometimes several times a year), that is just a fact. So if one is going to attempt to make such a thread that has been done over and over and over it better be REALLY good, and this one wasn't. Sorry, but the timing does render his post irrelevant in a way, the whole thing hinged on U2's first night back and his reaction to it... how is that lost on you?

 

[MissVelvetDress_75]

I happen to like this thread and think the opinions are very good.

 

[65980]

Since my reasonable points -- in defense of an unjustly attacked thread -- are falling on typically deaf ears, why don't we get back on topic and forget about judgementally evaluating everyone's posts?

 

[BVS]

forget about judgementally evaluating everyone's posts?

Yes, please, listen to your own advice... It will do this whole forum some good.

Since my reasonable points -- in defense of an unjustly attacked thread -- are falling on typically deaf ears, why don't we get back on topic

"Attacked"? This victim mentality is getting old. When people are asking you to watch your tone, your points aren't being "reasonable".

 

[65980]

Yes, please, listen to your own advice... It will do this whole forum some good.

That's lovely -- I can see you're been influenced by the music of U2.

I regret that I mentioned you in passing (and criticized you directly) -- albeit I did in as an aside in the context of a much larger and actually purposeful post -- because I didn't realize you would take it and run with it for three pages, sending me numerous messages, and wasting other forum-members' time with it.

"Attacked"? This victim mentality is getting old.

The "attack" I refer to is upon the original poster. Good God, I couldn't care less if you want to attack me!

When people are asking you to watch your tone, your points aren't being "reasonable".

Which proves my point. I asked you to watch your tone, and you ignored it.

Anyway, as I mentioned in our private-message battle, I'd rather not waste forum-members' time with a back-and-forth pointless exchange. If you want to slam me further, please do so with another private message.

 

[BVS]

 

[indra]

I happen to like this thread and think the opinions are very good.

Me too. It's one of the more interesting ones of late.

As for timing -- what the hell? I didn't know there was a specific time fans were allowed to get the nagging feeling their favourite band was past it's prime. Huh. Learn something new every day.

 

[BVS]

As for timing -- what the hell? I didn't know there was a specific time fans were allowed to get the nagging feeling their favourite band was past it's prime. Huh. Learn something new every day.

That wasn't the point.

 

[An Cat Gav]

I suggest you watch your tone.

What did he say that was so wrong?

 

[mikal]

i saw this thread going in this direction before it even started.

 

[indra]

That wasn't the point.

Really?

Look, if anything, I think you chose a very odd time to write such a thread. I can see doing so after hearing a new album, or experiencing their latest tour, etc... But to do so when the band for the first time in over a decade has road tested new material, has several projects on the way and had(even the most negative in here have said) a pretty amazing return to form in a postponed tour seems to be bad timing.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

As for my view on if U2 has peaked -- for me, yes, they did so quite a while ago. Others disagree with that view. I'm ok with that. I'll listen to the songs I enjoy and won't listen to the ones I don't.

 

[BVS]

Really?

No where in that post did I say anything about certain times fans are ALLOWED to do anything. I just stated that I found the timing to be odd. U2 come out to arguably one of the their best returns, and that's the day he decides to make this thread. I've seen some of the biggest naysayers in interference being impressed by this return AND it's only one day in, the timing seems odd to me

As for my view on if U2 has peaked -- for me, yes, they did so quite a while ago. Others disagree with that view. I'm ok with that. I'll listen to the songs I enjoy and won't listen to the ones I don't.

And this was the point of my first post, I think like many here have stated that U2 actually "peaked" a long time ago, but that doesn't mean I write them off.

 

[monsieur fly]

What is so "baffling" about it? Did you see my first post, did you see the context to which the second post was made?

This thread DOES get made every year(or sometimes several times a year), that is just a fact. So if one is going to attempt to make such a thread that has been done over and over and over it better be REALLY good, and this one wasn't. Sorry, but the timing does render his post irrelevant in a way, the whole thing hinged on U2's first night back and his reaction to it... how is that lost on you?

I am baffled because I do not think you should be judging the 'timing' of other people's threads. The number of replies will determine the extent to which it is relevant or not; we do not need you or anyone else to tell us the answer by way of a running commentary. I am aware that BSB Bono used the first night of the tour as a springboard for the discussion and like you, I am more optimistic about the two new songs than BSB Bono is. Nevertheless, there is no right or wrong time to raise concerns; and in any case, he then placed them in the wider context of the band's direction since Pop. For me, he made several good points. I do not care what inspired him to make them- all I know is that I found them interesting and worthy of further discussion.

 

[monsieur fly]

Me too. It's one of the more interesting ones of late.

As for timing -- what the hell? I didn't know there was a specific time fans were allowed to get the nagging feeling their favourite band was past it's prime. Huh. Learn something new every day.

Fully agreed.

 

[monsieur fly]

What did he say that was so wrong?

Exactly!

 

[Sicy]

If a moderator wants to 'evaluate' a thread, they have every right to.

Lets get this thread back on topic now and if anyone has further issues with other members it needs to be taken up with them in private via PM.

 

[KUEFC09U2]

Who can ever be so sure that any future U2 album wont be critically acclaimed? so IMO how can we ever define when U2's "peak" will be? nothing is ever certain.