I feel that U2 has peaked musically...

[NoControl]

I became a U2 fan in 1992 when I received Achtung Baby for my B-day. I was instantly enamoured with their music and bought all of their albums. I felt that each record was better than the other to varying degrees but to this day AB still remains my favourite album. It strikes the perfect ballance between originality, innovation and experimentation. With the Zoo TV tour, Zooropa, Original Soundtrack 1 (Passengers), Pop and the PopMart tour, U2 continued their innovative streak that I became accustomed to and I enjoyed those recordings as well.

But then in the late 90s something happened to U2. With the media and fan backlash of PopMart tour and the album Pop (even though the album sold 6 million copies and the tour sold 3.9 million tickets), they all of a sudden started making music that was "safe". In other words, they were too worried to continue their innovative streak to weather yet another backlash. And they were worried about their popularity. In 2000, they gave us All You Can't Leave Behind. It was a good album but nothing that made my mouth drop to the floor. And yes, it was a "safe" album, no matter what anyone says. They didn't take any chances, The Edge wasn't experimenting with his guitar effects like he used to and the rest of the band wasn't experimenting either. The Elevation went onto become the largest tour of the year in 2001 and AYCLB has sold neary 12 million copies to date.

Earlier today, I heard for the first time their new single, Vertigo. It's not a bad song, I think it resembles I Will Follow meeting Beautiful Day. And you know, I was really hoping that U2 would return to putting their balls on the line and to start making innovative music yet once again. But after listening to Vertigo several times, I've come to the conclusion that they are yet once again way too concerned with popularity, money, accolades and acclaim to make music that is refreshing and progressive, hence pushing the envelope like they want to be doing and IMO what they should be doing.

I might pick up How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb when it's released in two months, I may not. And I might go check them out when they play here in the Spring if it's affordable. But my friends, in terms of sheer innovation and uniqueness, U2 have reached their peak musically.

It's sad I know but that's how I feel.

 

[t8thgr8]

the way i look at u2 is that they have an album for every mood. and what about u2 throughout the 80's? it all sounds similar, it was only in the 90's that the electronica came out. i dont miss the electronica, it was cool for the moment but now im ready for rock and roll.

 

[elevation]

I became a U2 fan in 1992 when I received Achtung Baby for my B-day. I was instantly enamoured with their music and bought all of their albums. I felt that each record was better than the other to varying degrees but to this day AB still remains my favourite album. It strikes the perfect ballance between originality, innovation and experimentation. With the Zoo TV tour, Zooropa, Original Soundtrack 1 (Passengers), Pop and the PopMart tour, U2 continued their innovative streak that I became accustomed to and I enjoyed those recordings as well.

But then in the late 90s something happened to U2. With the media and fan backlash of PopMart tour and the album Pop (even though the album sold 6 million copies and the tour sold 3.9 million tickets), they all of a sudden started making music that was "safe". In other words, they were too worried to continue their innovative streak to weather yet another backlash. And they were worried about their popularity. In 2000, they gave us All You Can't Leave Behind. It was a good album but nothing that made my mouth drop to the floor. And yes, it was a "safe" album, no matter what anyone says. They didn't take any chances, The Edge wasn't experimenting with his guitar effects like he used to and the rest of the band wasn't experimenting either. The Elevation went onto become the largest tour of the year in 2001 and AYCLB has sold neary 12 million copies to date.

Earlier today, I heard for the first time their new single, Vertigo. It's not a bad song, I think it resembles I Will Follow meeting Beautiful Day. And you know, I was really hoping that U2 would return to putting their balls on the line and to start making innovative music yet once again. But after listening to Vertigo several times, I've come to the conclusion that they are yet once again way too concerned with popularity, money, accolades and acclaim to make music that is refreshing and progressive, hence pushing the envelope like they want to be doing and IMO what they should be doing.

I might pick up How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb when it's released in two months, I may not. And I might go check them out when they play here in the Spring if it's affordable. But my friends, in terms of sheer innovation and uniqueness, U2 have reached their peak musically.

It's sad I know but that's how I feel.

I couldn't agree more

 

[innocent_eyes]

agree with t8thgr8...

..u gotta admit, Vertigo is a wild sound! Thats a lotta heavy and fast for U2, i think it's diferent and ballsy. It blew the socks off 3 casual U2 fans today when they came over to hear it. They said it was the best they've heard from U2...

..I agree

 

[jacobus]

they peaked in 1991 with ACHTUNG BABY...they will never have again an album like that. 1991 what a year in music...metallica, guns and roses, nirvana, pearl jam, rhcp, massive attack and u2 !!
btw vertigo is a good song but not a great song they mix too much of their former styles (wire, uteotw, elevation, bass like god part II, lnoe, boy...) the fly was groundbreaking vertigo isn't...
as i said good but not breathtaking.

 

[rivergoat]

I've come to the conclusion that they are yet once again way too concerned with popularity, money, accolades and acclaim to make music that is refreshing and progressive, hence pushing the envelope like they want to be doing and IMO what they should be doing.

Since when has U2 been about anything BUT making money? They've ALWAYS been concerned with "popularity, money, accolades and acclaim" (to use your words). Don't worry, they ARE doing what they WANT to be doing - and well, if it's not to your liking, then it's not to YOUR liking. Obviously they put ALOT of time and hard work into this album, so I can't help but think that this is music they want to make.

I'm NOT defending the new single or the album (neither of which I've heard yet - but I will get ahold of the single shortly). I'm just tired of people putting U2 on some kind of pedestal. "Gee, they're trying to SELL records and concert tickets! They're making music that ALOT people will want to listen to! OMIGOD THEY'VE SOLD OUT!!!"

U2 NEVER stay in the same place musically... it just so happens that Achtung Baby was a style of U2 music that you like the most. Other people think U2 sucked after The Joshua Tree... still others think that ATYCLB is the end-all and be-all of U2. Good thing that U2 DIDN'T stay in one style.. they'd be history long before now.

To say that U2 have peaked musically because they haven't kept making the same noise they made over a decade ago is just ludicrous. They just kept moving down the highway while you remained at the same roadside diner eating off the same menu over and over again.

Hmmm.. food...

goat

 

[U2girl]

*sigh*

ATYCLB (not experimeting? I was under the impression U2 did not have songs that sounded like BD, Stuck, In a little while, Wild honey and Grace before) would be called "safe" even if it was more rocking, as long as it wouldn't have the multi-effects Pop did.
(which was a 50-50 album songwise and badly executed the idea, bad sales and bad tour attendancde. of course they had to regain popularity)

Much as some like to argue it, U2 is NOT known for their experimenting but their songwriting which includes Edge's trademark sound (gasp - U2 sounds like U2) and there were plenty of people who enjoyed the band getting back to that.

 

[thrillme]

Hehe, someone's hungry .

------------------

Pah and fie! First off, U2 started when they were teens, so give them a little break, a band with their kind of longetivity, it's harder to break new ground, especially if you're the ones who did some of that ground breaking.

Not to mention, that Larry and Adam have both taken lessons in their respective instruments, since Achtung Baby. Maybe we just haven't got a chance to see what they are fully capable of.

Edge created a style of playing, all his own, Adam was self-taught up until 1993-4, as was Bono in singing and guitar. That adds to their uniqueness.

Madonna, I've heard some of her songs, that sound really similar, but are many years apart. Lyrically much different, but not so much in sound.

U2 are unique. There's no need for them to do anything these days, to make them unique, they already are. You can't name too many bands who've kept the same lineup as long as they have, and are still friends, and relevant. They have modern rock stations, playing their new single. You don't hear the Rolling Stones on modern rock stations, even if they do release a new song. U2's first album came out in 1980, many of their contemporaries, don't get on stations I hear U2 get played on.

U2 is both modern and classic.

They've broken so much new ground in their career, for them, it's harder.

btw, ATYCLB is not that safe, musically, perhaps, I'm not into muso? stuff, but lyrically, quite the contrary as a deeper look into the lyrics would show.

And I'm one of the younger U2 fans, (early 20's), so this new album is both exciting and a whole new experience!

 

[Salome]

IAnd yes, it was a "safe" album, no matter what anyone says.

well, that should make sure this will be a high quality thread with some great discussions

 

[Diemen]

U2girl, I think the point that NoControl is making in regards to experimentation and innovation is that in past years U2 wouldn't be afraid to go in a direction that might harm album sales for the sake of artistic endeavors. There was a time when U2 intentionally kept some songs off albums because they would be too much of a sure-fire pop hit (Hold Me Thrill Me... and Zooropa, for instance).

Now, however, U2 are so firmly committed to remaining a popular act that they can try new things as long as it's not too risky and is still easy to swallow by the masses. Lemon was risky. Mofo was risky. Vertigo, while a fun romping rock song, isn't risky.

Now perhaps this is just the natural order of things for a band such as U2, that because of the massive success of Achtung Baby they were able to pursue whatever they felt like for a while because they were in no danger of falling off the face of the earth, and now they have to remain popular to remain viable. The fact that they did branch out artistically for the mid-late 90s might be the reason they have to pay attention to their popularity more, but I for one wouldn't mind U2 not trying so hard to remain in the limelight and taking more artistic risks instead. I wouldn't mind if a new U2 album wasn't accompanied with a mass marketing blitz, but instead was relatively quiet but heralded by critics as a daring and innovative artistic statement.

Am I still excited as hell to hear the new album? Of course! But I think I tend to agree with NoControl more than I disagree. I think U2 may have already passed their artistic/innovative peak (Achtung Baby through Pop, imo). Not to say that they're dead in the water now, though. The new phase they're in seems to be more single/radio oriented, where turning out a loose collection of solid individual song is more important than using an album to tell a story or explore a concept, and I guess when it comes down to it I prefer exploring a concept. But either way I'm along for the ride.

 

[BigMacPhisto]

U2 isn't going safe....this is the third stage of their career.....ATYCLB and HTDAAB both have a stripped down approach where the band relies on a traditional rock sound.....it's extremely inventive for what it is, as they're seeing how far they can take the approach......I can assure you that U2 doesn't sit down and try to make records that the public will enjoy, they're trying to do something innovative instead. Listen to "Vertigo" again.....the solo, the breakdown near the end, the lyrics.....it's a change of pace for U2.

 

[NoControl]

U2girl, I think the point that NoControl is making in regards to experimentation and innovation is that in past years U2 wouldn't be afraid to go in a direction that might harm album sales for the sake of artistic endeavors. There was a time when U2 intentionally kept some songs off albums because they would be too much of a sure-fire pop hit (Hold Me Thrill Me... and Zooropa, for instance).

Now, however, U2 are so firmly committed to remaining a popular act that they can try new things as long as it's not too risky and is still easy to swallow by the masses. Lemon was risky. Mofo was risky. Vertigo, while a fun romping rock song, isn't risky.

Now perhaps this is just the natural order of things for a band such as U2, that because of the massive success of Achtung Baby they were able to pursue whatever they felt like for a while because they were in no danger of falling off the face of the earth, and now they have to remain popular to remain viable. The fact that they did branch out artistically for the mid-late 90s might be the reason they have to pay attention to their popularity more, but I for one wouldn't mind U2 not trying so hard to remain in the limelight and taking more artistic risks instead. I wouldn't mind if a new U2 album wasn't accompanied with a mass marketing blitz, but instead was relatively quiet but heralded by critics as a daring and innovative artistic statement.

Am I still excited as hell to hear the new album? Of course! But I think I tend to agree with NoControl more than I disagree. I think U2 may have already passed their artistic/innovative peak (Achtung Baby through Pop, imo). Not to say that they're dead in the water now, though. The new phase they're in seems to be more single/radio oriented, where turning out a loose collection of solid individual song is more important than using an album to tell a story or explore a concept, and I guess when it comes down to it I prefer exploring a concept. But either way I'm along for the ride.

Exactly right and thank you. I'm glad at least a few of us understand.

I'm am musician and have played guitar for 11 years, so I hear what I hear and to me it's retrogressive and that 's not a good thing...

 

[u2ulysses]

I couldn't agree more

Well, I could not agree less.

The first three albums all sound very similar.

UF through R&H all sound very similar.

AB-Pop all sound very similar.

It was the transition in sound from "War" to UF that people found intriguing. It was then the second transition in sound from R&H to AB that people found intriguing. Granted, if one listens closely to "War", one hears hints of what's to come. The same is true with R&H to AB.

ATYCLB was unique in that it seemed both a step back and a step forward. It was as if U2 examined the best sounds of their past, and then brought them forward for the new millennium. Furthermore, U2 did experiment - but probably not in the way you liked or appreciated. For example, name one U2 album where you can hear a song like "Stuck in a Moment...". That is easily U2's most soulful song, far more than anything they've ever done before. "Stuck..." *might* have fit on R&H, but even then, this song's soul easily beats anything U2 did there.

As for the new album, I refuse to comment based on one song and some low quality snippets of other songs. The new song, though, really is similar to ATYCLB in that it's both a step back and a step forward. U2 seemed to capture the energy they had with "Boy" and brought it forward to 2004. This song isn't another "I Will Follow" by any means, but it has the energy of such a song. If the rest of "How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb" is similar, then we can group ATYCLB and HTDAAB together as U2 reinvorgorating their past for the future. In other words, this is yet another step forward - bringing the "classic" U2 sound to perfection.

You may argue that it's this re-evaluation of the past that you don't like. But you have to remember, this is U2. By their very nature they will have their own sound. Every single album has moments that sound like other albums. You'll always have a Bono wail or Edge's echo effect. There'll be lyrics with the words "sky" and "kneel" and "Jesus/God" in them. Every single band/artist can't help but sound like themselves. The fact that U2 has had what I consider 3 major transitions (from "War" to UF, from R&H to AB, and from "Pop" to ATYCLB) is damn impressive.

I see nothing wrong with U2 sounding like U2. What I care about more is HOW they go about sounding like U2. Exploring a past sound, like we hear on "Beautiful Day" or "Vertigo" works because U2 didn't COPY their old sound - but explored it, modernized it, re-energized it. This is why "Beautiful Day" became such a hit.

There have been plenty of bands/artists that fail to change their sound enough. One of my favorite bands, INXS, sadly was one of them. Before Hutchence's tragic passing, INXS's last album sounded just like earlier albums. And those earlier albums sounded just like even earlier albums. In other words, it's as if I was listening to one song, with just slight changes in lyrics and tempo. All the songs blended together. In contrast, I can never say that about U2.

So while ATYCLB may have been "safe", after a decade of experimentation, I think U2 had every right to tone things down and drop the charade. They wanted to sound like U2. Nothing wrong with that. Based on "Vertigo", it appears U2 wants to sound like U2 again - but now the harder rocking punk style, as opposed to the more soft style.

As someone wrote, there is a U2 album for every mood and feeling. And this is what has made U2 popular for 25 years.

 

[Jim]

HOLD YOUR HORSES!! It's ONE song..Bono said yesterday: the other songs "go somewhere very different"....

U2's long-awaited new album, 'How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb', is due for release on November 22. Bono said that despite the title, the follow-up to 2000's 'All That You Can't Leave Behind' is a personal rather than a political piece of work.

"It's an incredible thing to finish it, it's like getting out of jail," he said.

"It's very important for us that it will be a great piece of work, not just good or even very good. You can't live like we live, have all this success and make a crap album. I can't live with that."

The first song on the album is a rock song but the remainder of the tracks "go somewhere very different", Bono said.

"I think we might have touched a bit of magic. The Edge is on fire in a way that I haven't heard him in many years. He's an extraordinary guitar player, a great genius of a musician, and I think he deserves all the accolade on this one."

"go somewhere very different",

 

[popacrobat]

why do they have to make risky music?

 

[tkramer]

Uh, I have to agree with Jim. You didn't get the whole Album off a 3 minute song. Imagine if you had to give your opinion of POP based on the lead single. It's good but says nothing of the whole picture. Even more than that, how can you tell the direction of a band? I'm not saying you're wrong, personally I think ABaby will forever sit on a throne of art and innovation, but let's revisit this in two months.

 

[hurley joe]

I must say I agree with U2ulysses a lot.

The first three albums sound very similar - though they differ much in terms of songwriting and themes of the lyrics.
Then they chose a completely different path on UF and Joshua Tree just to chop down the trees after R 'n' H to make Achtung Baby which took U2 into a whole new world in which they stayed until the Pop-album.

Then again I must admit that NoControl has a point when discussing ATYCLB. Here the Boy has grown up to be a confident and secure man with his own children and doesn't need to take risks. To me that sounds a bit boring. Having said that I still think it's a good album, just a bit to controlled.

The point here is that U2 makes the music they like to make and suits their mood and lifes.
And judging from Vertigo they are hungry and out there hunting again. Bono used to say that U2:s music was built around a spark. It looks like they've found it again.
This can very well be the album I've dreamt of for years. The early energy and spark mixed with the heavier U2-sound of today!

But still I miss one thing: The songs are often better even musically when the lyrics means something for Bono and he feels he have something important to say.

The Fly, the first single from AB, got pretty bad reviews (at least here in Sweden) and was considered to not keeping up with the times - while the album got great reviews by the same reporters.
So this will be a great album far from being safe. U2 isn't following any musical trend at all - as usual they are setting them. And that's not safe!

 

[caylan]

THANK YOU!! JIM for saying it .
It's like the NFL. It's only one game & every1 wants to make it out like its doomsday.

There something refreshing about Vertigo in that you don't hear that stuff anymore...So that's inventive in its own way. Now lets wait to see what else the Album produces.

My money is on them still being @ the top with a CD that doesn't sound like the previous one.
Needless to say, the only Albums that even sounded remotely closeto the prior one was Zooropa. OTherwise, they have created vastly different mosaics for the last 20 years!

HOLD YOUR HORSES!! It's ONE song..Bono said yesterday: the other songs "go somewhere very different"....

U2's long-awaited new album, 'How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb', is due for release on November 22. Bono said that despite the title, the follow-up to 2000's 'All That You Can't Leave Behind' is a personal rather than a political piece of work.

"It's an incredible thing to finish it, it's like getting out of jail," he said.

"It's very important for us that it will be a great piece of work, not just good or even very good. You can't live like we live, have all this success and make a crap album. I can't live with that."

The first song on the album is a rock song but the remainder of the tracks "go somewhere very different", Bono said.

"I think we might have touched a bit of magic. The Edge is on fire in a way that I haven't heard him in many years. He's an extraordinary guitar player, a great genius of a musician, and I think he deserves all the accolade on this one."

"go somewhere very different",

 

[BVS]

This argument is retrogressive. People have said this about every other band ever to exist.

Thanks Jim, for some reality in here.

 

[Saracene]

Yeah, the band is probably past another bold Achtung-style reinvention. I think though that U2 took their 90s direction as far as they could and were running out of steam somewhat by the times of POP. And I'm not sure what radical new direction they could have gone with - talented though they may be they have limitations just like any other band/artist.

 

[Flying FuManchu]

WTF!?!??!

I believe I'm as big about naysaying as anyone but I would save this negativity is a little premature as Jim has said. We've only heard one song off the album in its fullness and entirety. Hell, Vertigo is proof that a song done put out by the Spaniards could be way different from what you would think.

As for innovation... these days, rock n roll and innovation are close to becoming an oxymoron, IMO. Its just the nature of the beast. Hell, IMO guitar is nearing that place where "innovations" are hard as hell to find.

 

[Flying FuManchu]

In other words I would save the main post until I've heard the whole album... LOL...

There could be truth in what is being said about U2 not being as innovative, but lets not jump the gun. ATYCLB was the album of 2000. I look forward to what they have in 2004.

 

[UnforgettableLemon]

"Every gimmick-hungry yob digging gold from rock n' roll grabs the mike to tell us that he'll die before he's sold. But I believe in this andit's been tested by research: he who f*cks nuns will later join the church."- Joe Strummer
Courting the commercial element is just part of being a rock star, no matter how much integrity you have. There are very very very very few exceptions to this.

I think they sound happy. When's the last time they actually made music this much *fun* I think that's a perfectly reasonable goal for a band that's already done so much

 

[Jimmy2004]

While I agree that it is important for any band and artist to continue evolving, pushing boundaries and changing their sound, it has to be said that U2 have already done that to a great extent. Pop was highly experimental, and the fact of the matter is that it wasn't a fantastic album. As someone has already said, it was 50/50 in terms of song writing. I think that ATYCLB was an attempt to regain mass popularity, but I also believe that they needed to go back their older sound in order to regain that spark and in order to maintain a high standars of songwriting. By no means did they "sell out," that would be sticking to a certian formula that they knew would guarantee success. U2 have not done that, they are constantly creating and changing their sound, but I think now they are going through a point in their career where they are reflecting on past work and trying to find out how to get the best out of their talents and different musical eras.

 

[Jimmy2004]

Also, just to clarify what "selling out" means - to put it like Manyard James Keenan.... "Everything you know about me is what I've sold you, motherfucker."

 

[U2FAN4LIFE]

This argument is retrogressive. People have said this about every other band ever to exist.

Thanks Jim, for some reality in here.

I can't agree more!

Its kind of frustrating to hear people complain about U2 not taking risks but I totally respect that, this is a forum and like many others I was hoping for something really new as well ( AB through POP happens to be my fave U2 era)

Now while I was a little disappointed at first that Vertigo wasn't a huge progressive leap (it is somewhat derivative) I've started to look at things a little differently now...

Really, what else can U2 do that's progressive (and new to U2)without producing something that is so "inappropriate" they would lose even their most dedicated fans?
They've been power-pop/punk-rock, they've been straight up rock, they've been roots/country/rock, they've been europop/rock/funk, they've been rock/dance, they've been rock/techno, they've been ambient, they've been soul/rock... what's left?

I suppose they could try hip/hop? or maybe a spoken word album with Edge on the banjo, Adam on the digeri doo (sp?) and Larry playing a kettle drum... wait, they could do reggae!!!!

I believe those people trashing Vertigo because its not progressive are really just upset that its not the same style as their favorite U2 era!

Something else... have U2 really been that progressive? Just think about everything that was around before every new U2 era and then ask yourself if U2 has followed trends or created them?
The first three albums were influenced by the Clash/Ramones etc.
The Lovetown era was influenced by American Roots music, AB was influenced by the Manchester sound (Jesus Jones / Stone Roses etc.) ,POP/Dance, Passengers/Ambient, ATYCLB/Top 40Pop
HTDAAB / ???? (but I think it may be garage rock)


I think U2 have been masters at taking the "new trends" of any given era, applying their musicianship, unique sound, some heart and soul, and solid lyrics to produce great music. The common denominator across all U2 eras is that there are a few masterpieces on every album that have so much heart and soul that you can't helped be moved. That's why I love u2 : )

 

[withashout]

word to U2FAN4LIFE...good summarization...

 

[ponkine]

Hola amigos

As I said it once my friends, hystory don´t lies I mean, I can´t remember ANY band or artist who has released their truly masterpiece on their last album. Even U2, all fans we´re agree their masterpiece is "Joshua Tree" or "Acthung Baby".
I think being musician is like the the same life you born, you grow, you grow-up, you reach your peak working, thinking, creating, doing anything you want and then you turn older and older
The same situation is with bands, that´s the reason why bands usually gives their masterpiece on the first or middle career albums. Just some Examples:

"The Dark Side Of The Moon" or "The Wall" - Pink Floyd
"Revolver" or "Sgt Pepper..." - The Beatles
"A Night At The Opera" - Queen
"Metallica" - Metallica
"Appetite For Destruction" - Guns N´Roses
"Nevermind" - Nirvana
"Led Zeppelin IV" - Led Zeppelin
"Plastic Ono Band" - John Lennon
"All Thing Must Pass" - George Harrison
"Ok Computer" - Radiohead

Please try to understand my words I´m not saying after the masterpiece album all further records are just crap , I´m just saying every band have their peak and then they slowly go down, some band quickly and some others slowly.
I think U2 is now giving a small climbing again, after the terrible go down during 1999-2003
After "The Hands That Built America" ( worst U2 song ever, in my opinion ) I though the band was almost officialy dead, with no energy, no ideas left, etc.
But with "Vertigo" the band seems to be 1000 times stronger than in that horrible and boring song . I think this new album will be better than the dissapointing ATYCLB, but I don´t think it will be better than "Joshua Tree", "Unforgettable Fire" or "Acthung Baby".

 

[Popmartijn]

Yeah, the band is probably past another bold Achtung-style reinvention. I think though that U2 took their 90s direction as far as they could and were running out of steam somewhat by the times of POP. And I'm not sure what radical new direction they could have gone with - talented though they may be they have limitations just like any other band/artist.

I think that at least one member here is still waiting for that acoustic ambient album.
But you are right, in what way could U2 have experimented more? Prog-rock?


C ya!

Marty

 

[U2girl]

U2girl, I think the point that NoControl is making in regards to experimentation and innovation is that in past years U2 wouldn't be afraid to go in a direction that might harm album sales for the sake of artistic endeavors. There was a time when U2 intentionally kept some songs off albums because they would be too much of a sure-fire pop hit (Hold Me Thrill Me... and Zooropa, for instance).

Now, however, U2 are so firmly committed to remaining a popular act that they can try new things as long as it's not too risky and is still easy to swallow by the masses. Lemon was risky. Mofo was risky. Vertigo, while a fun romping rock song, isn't risky.

Now perhaps this is just the natural order of things for a band such as U2, that because of the massive success of Achtung Baby they were able to pursue whatever they felt like for a while because they were in no danger of falling off the face of the earth, and now they have to remain popular to remain viable. The fact that they did branch out artistically for the mid-late 90s might be the reason they have to pay attention to their popularity more, but I for one wouldn't mind U2 not trying so hard to remain in the limelight and taking more artistic risks instead. I wouldn't mind if a new U2 album wasn't accompanied with a mass marketing blitz, but instead was relatively quiet but heralded by critics as a daring and innovative artistic statement.

Am I still excited as hell to hear the new album? Of course! But I think I tend to agree with NoControl more than I disagree. I think U2 may have already passed their artistic/innovative peak (Achtung Baby through Pop, imo). Not to say that they're dead in the water now, though. The new phase they're in seems to be more single/radio oriented, where turning out a loose collection of solid individual song is more important than using an album to tell a story or explore a concept, and I guess when it comes down to it I prefer exploring a concept. But either way I'm along for the ride.

To everything there is a season. Where else could U2 possibly go after Pop, to experiment?
I'd much rather have solid songs - which I'm sure they will ultimately be known in history for - over loops and effects and samples.

They probably felt they reached a dead end of sorts and wanted to try and sound more basic again - nothing wrong with that, as critics and fans proved. (didn't hear Vertigo yet, myself - and if the reviews of "Dismantle" are true, we're getting much more than just ATYCLB with more guitars, like some say)

I don't see why U2 should stray away from the public and media attention - they played on a roof to shoot a video, they had a movie, and huge tours with all kind of light effects and technology. Once they reached their status with JT, there was no going back.