Invisible - Reactions Thread (Do not post song requests - Discussion only!)
- Thread starter bono_212
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
- Status
Nick66
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
You think this song is better than MOS? Or NLOTH?
U2freakboy
War Child
- Joined
- May 6, 2005
- Messages
- 703
I do. Love both of those songs, especially NLOTH, but not as much as Invisible.
Delvis Crasho
Babyface
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2014
- Messages
- 8
I dig it.
Wasn't sure at first. Only listened to it a couple times yesterday. The video/commercial really brought it into focus, though, and got the tune stuck in my head. I'm not about to praise it like some around here and say it's better than this or better than that, but it's a solid radio pop song.
Wasn't sure at first. Only listened to it a couple times yesterday. The video/commercial really brought it into focus, though, and got the tune stuck in my head. I'm not about to praise it like some around here and say it's better than this or better than that, but it's a solid radio pop song.
Nick66
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
Interesting...I couldn't disagree more, but there it is. De gustibus non est disputandum.
gvox
Ghost of Love
Is this new avatar you? Nice shot!.
(and don't let the
)
Tommy WM
War Child
I think I like it. The ending part is catchy as hell....but it's not the Danger Mouse production I'm used too.....yet anyway
. On a positive note they have no excuse playing songs from Pop now if this is the direction they're taking it. Maybe also some tunes from Zooropa like Lemon or Dirty Day 
. On a positive note they have no excuse playing songs from Pop now if this is the direction they're taking it. Maybe also some tunes from Zooropa like Lemon or Dirty Day
gvox
Ghost of Love
So their total will now be $16 million rather than $10M?
They had previously committed to $2M via downloads + $8M in "simple" donation
They also have committed to donor match contributions up to $1000 each donor, until a specified date I think which is December 31. What I'm not clear is if this matching scheme was going to form part of the $8M commitment, which seems possible I suppose..
gvox
Ghost of Love
well just listened to it this morning for probably the 30th time, and after a break from it, i still love it. It would be a good opening track or at least fit with an overall album theme. Most of the over-reaction to the negative is treating this as a new single.
I really love the bass line and will want to enjoy it further with cd quality. I'm hoping (there's an outside chance) that a version of the album will show up on a hi-rez downloads to buy.
I think u2 needs to lose some more sleep and finish this record.
x 1000000
Hollow Island
New Yorker
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2011
- Messages
- 2,947
The reaction would be different if the song/Super Bowl ad wasn't for charity. If this song - this pleasant, unremarkable bit of pandering - was soundtracking a Bank of America ad, was meant to promote the bank and U2, was meant to align U2 with the bank, I think that it would be perceived differently.
People drooled when Boots came out, too. I think that once the excitement of a new U2 song dies down there will be a correction.
That's true. Quality has a way of lessening the importance of motivation. It's a decent little song, a nice late career song. Well written, decently performed, but without the spark that made the band great.
The reason people expect U2 to act like Radiohead is because they were Radiohead before Radiohead existed. It's like you're in 1984 and have accepted the rewriting of the past. The main difference between the two is that Radiohead never went backwards and tried to rewrite the Bends.
But yes, it's time to put to bed any notion that U2 will do anything else than try to fit into the mainstream. As long as the music is good, it doesn't really matter, but it does damage their reputation. U2 are viewed very differently now than they were in the 90s, and they're not respected quite as much.
If U2 want to be relevant, they need to be influenced by better, more artistically credible artists, like they were in the 80s and especially the 90s, and like Radiohead have been. For what it's worth, Pitchfork, for the first time has completely ignored the existence of Invisible. I think that says something about how relevant U2 are. It also says something about Pitchfork.
gvox
Ghost of Love
That's alot of "ifs" that aren't really relevant and aren't even realistic because there's no evidence U2 would ever do such a thing.
Here's a more relevant comparison: how the song would be perceived if it was just dropped by U2 as their next single, no mention of charity.
And I don't think the reaction would be much different, at all. It's a hit, and the only reason it won't chart is if these rules about free downloads get applied to it. Otherwise, it's a hit. Radio everywhere is playing the shit out of it apparently. It's U2's next hit, for the next bit ie until the real lead single comes out, is my guess.
A few people here, mainly. I for one never drooled. The general public thought it was crap, radio didn't play it for very long and the performance of it at the Grammy's was uncomfortable. There was way more excitement for a new album in general than for Boots. And there wasn't much "WOW IF BOOTS IS THE DIRECTION THEYRE HEADED BRING ON THE NEW ALBUM" at all, if any. Noone that I can recall was saying that about Boots.
I hear subtle nods to the influences of Joy Division-New Order, Depeche Mode, Big Country, OMD, etc etc in Invisible, and those bands owe a huge debt of influence to other earlier ' artistically credible' acts. You don't think any of those influences are 'artistically credible'? Well, sorry, that's a laugh.
And fuck Radiohead. A band considered great by many I supppose who I hope U2 never attempts to sound like or be in any way. If there's one thing I hate more than hearing "U2 sound like Coldplay" it's "U2 need to be more like Radiohead" (or, PJ, Bruce, etc etc)
bedouin fire
Refugee
Well, what I’ve learned from having an irrational love for this band for more than 25 years is that it takes several years to develop a connection with U2 songs (maybe I’m slow) and it can be an unfinished process. Whatever I feel about this song right now (and what I feel is mainly joy because I have a new u2 song that I can’t stop listen) is not relevant at all when comparing to the emotional connection I have with U2 songs that are part of my life for decades… As such, and as opposite to many of you, I’m just not able to make any big judgement on invisible.
Nevertheless I found this small review from the Guardian that, from a musical point of view on how the song sounds (and only that), is aligned with my initial thoughts:
So while November's Ordinary Love was U2 in default mode, the brittle, electronic passage that opens Invisible is something of a surprise, coming on more like Joy Division than Coldplay-covering-U2-covering-Coldplay. Of course, by the time the sky-scraping chorus crashes in, ushered by some typically chiming guitars, the whole thing shifts and we're on safer ground, but there's a more textured, characterful feel to it all. By the final coda of "there is no them, there's only us", which is the sort of chant-worthy rock lyric you'd expect from U2, you sort of feel happy to have them back.
U2 – Invisible: New music | Music | theguardian.com
Nevertheless I found this small review from the Guardian that, from a musical point of view on how the song sounds (and only that), is aligned with my initial thoughts:
So while November's Ordinary Love was U2 in default mode, the brittle, electronic passage that opens Invisible is something of a surprise, coming on more like Joy Division than Coldplay-covering-U2-covering-Coldplay. Of course, by the time the sky-scraping chorus crashes in, ushered by some typically chiming guitars, the whole thing shifts and we're on safer ground, but there's a more textured, characterful feel to it all. By the final coda of "there is no them, there's only us", which is the sort of chant-worthy rock lyric you'd expect from U2, you sort of feel happy to have them back.
U2 – Invisible: New music | Music | theguardian.com
Gonna Run 2 U
New Yorker
I was hoping that Adam and Larry were going to have more of a presence this time around with Danger Mouse. I hope Bono is right with the album having many different moods. I cant deal with an entire U2 album with drum machines and flat snares. I want them to have songs that have a production quality like "Trip Through Your Wires". This "current" state of production sounds very enclosed like it was entirely made by Danger Mouse by sampling Edge's guitar and using an MPC like a hip hop producer would.
Nick66
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
Well fuck Hollow Island for once you made me agree with Gvox. I don't think I really need to respond!
jeevey
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
What? Agreement? 
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Radiohead never went back and tried to rewrite the Bends, but they sure as hell have tried to rewrite Kid A now for several albums in a row.
Aygo
Rock n' Roll Doggie
That is interesting and it made me (re)think about Danger Mouse as a producer. He's pretty versatile, unlike others, in a certain way. What I mean is that DM can help to put out very raw (almost unpolished) material - like The Black Keys, but also songs that have loads of production on it (not saying it is bad, ok? just pointing the differences) like Gorillaz or Broken Bells.
Judging the only two new songs we already heard, I suppose that the work that U2 developed with DM will belong to the second group.
powerhour24
ONE love, blood, life
Not a lot to agree on in here, what with all the fascists and a conspicuous lack of FACTS, but this, very much.
powerhour24
ONE love, blood, life
Not to disagree about DM being versatile, but his work with The Black Keys is not "unpolished" by any stretch, everything they did before working with him on Attack & Release is to be sure, but no longer. Not complaining though, Attack & Release is my favorite release from them.
last unicorn
Blue Crack Addict
I saw on our national radio station's twitter account that they've played Invisible twice today which is great. I hardly ever listen to them because most of the music just sucks, but they just discovered Ordinary Love a couple of weeks ago and keep playing it more frequently now with U2 having the Golden Globe and all. It's kind of amazing that there are two separate brand new U2 songs played on that radio station now. They almost never play anything from U2 except the same old 3 or 4 songs from way back.
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
setting aside it's obvious emotionalism, i think this is the most energetic U2 have sounded since perhaps 1980.
Boy is an amazing album, sparkling and energetic and bratty and punky. someone mentioned when describing invisible that it had the energy of Out of Control -- i think that's spot on. it is fleet of foot, as the DM sessions were described back in 2011, and i'm hoping that's something we're going to get on the new album. the feeling of speed, of hurtling through space and soaring through the sky. and it's a direct "correction" of what i think is the biggest criticism of NLOTH -- that it was a mostly dark, turgid affair, complex and moody, and sometimes sounding like they were stuck in the mud. and when they tried to bring the energy -- the despised middle 3 -- it sounded like far too much effort.
there's real joy in this song. bring the energy!
Boy is an amazing album, sparkling and energetic and bratty and punky. someone mentioned when describing invisible that it had the energy of Out of Control -- i think that's spot on. it is fleet of foot, as the DM sessions were described back in 2011, and i'm hoping that's something we're going to get on the new album. the feeling of speed, of hurtling through space and soaring through the sky. and it's a direct "correction" of what i think is the biggest criticism of NLOTH -- that it was a mostly dark, turgid affair, complex and moody, and sometimes sounding like they were stuck in the mud. and when they tried to bring the energy -- the despised middle 3 -- it sounded like far too much effort.
there's real joy in this song. bring the energy!
mama cass
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2004
- Messages
- 6,293
the energy is great, and i love the way it feels so effortless and natural to them... (although i bet they worked their asses off to get it sounding like that haha)"Enclosed" is a very good way of putting it. Very professional but strangely stilted. This could be the most professionally produced U2 album of all time, maybe they'll be no real "clunkers" at all, but I'm not expecting it to contain songs in the league of Bad or MOS.
People drooled when Boots came out, too. I think that once the excitement of a new U2 song dies down there will be a correction.
I for one was NEVER excited for Boots..... and figured if this was the direction they were heading in I was finally jumping ship. I became to loathe Boots for many reasons but most of all they could have made any other song off of that album the lead single but made that one. MOS, one of the best songs they ever made, NLOTH or even Magnificent would have been a better choice.
I for one was NEVER excited for Boots..... and figured if this was the direction they were heading in I was finally jumping ship. I became to loathe Boots for many reasons but most of all they could have made any other song off of that album the lead single but made that one. MOS, one of the best songs they ever made, NLOTH or even Magnificent would have been a better choice.
Aygo
Rock n' Roll Doggie
I have already wrote that no one is asking U2 to become or behave like Radiohead, that's not part of their ADN (even though they tried to in the mid-90's... Before Radiohead's "existence"). I don't want a "Pyramid Song", no one ever expects that.
No one wants a Kid A. No one wants a Zooropa or Passengers again.
What many diehards here pretend they don't understand about the "dissidents" is that the dissidents want U2 to be U2 without spending years emulating themselves. They've done it for 20 years in a row, but the locked that part of their genesis away and threw away the key.
You mentioned the Pitchfork attitude of ignoring the new song. I'm in Lisbon these days and BLITZ magazine is pretty much our Rolling Stone (Blitz was a weekly journal from the 1980's 'till 2006, but it became a monthly magazine and it is percepted many times a portuguese copy-paste of the american Rolling Stone now).
U2 is the artist that made more times the cover of BLITZ magazine. In its website, I remember that it was one of the artists that used to generate the biggest discussions and attracted lots of attention from the readers.
Today, Blitz published the article about "Invisible" and, guess what... The post of the article in their Facebook page, by the morning, had just a few "likes" and no comments about the song content.
In the website it only had 7 comments and all of them were negative. But negative in terms of "I just don't care anymore". It goes from "no, thank you" to a "thank God this is not the real first single of the upcoming album". There's another one - the worst - that (translating to english) says something like: "It's not bad because it's just another disappointment. It's funny to feel that this song could've easily been released 14 years ago in All That You Can.... That is, U2 have shown no evolution at all over the past 15 years, not even "a drop". Always the same formula that Coldplay have already proved they can now apply it much better now. I never thought I'd say something like this, but U2 became a second-rate Coldplay."
This is not the type of things I used to listen about U2... (what?) 10 years ago or so.
It might be a sign that adopting the strategy of being generic, self-emulating the eureka moments of the past, to keep on appealing the masses, it may not be working anymore, whether they take 1 or 5 year gaps between albums that always sound the same... Even to the casual listeners.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
