LP13 Discussion - Rock Bottom: Still No F#@&*ng News!

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
I heard they're gonna play a free gig (one song) at Target to announce the album.
 
rennowba said:
That's because the UK is the best! :) or should I say England is the best


Sent from my iPad using U2 Interference
Click to expand...

UK is the best? There are countries where the band is a lot more popular and relevant. They should do a festival gig in the Netherlands!

Sent from my GT-I9505 using U2 Interference mobile app
 
Ouch, a 5 year long writer's block sounds immensely painful, I hope Bono sought and found professional help :hug:


I think this story is utter BS.
 
wolbersu2 said:
UK is the best? There are countries where the band is a lot more popular and relevant. They should do a festival gig in the Netherlands!

Sent from my GT-I9505 using U2 Interference mobile app
Click to expand...


Rule Britannia :)


Sent from my iPad using U2 Interference
 
I don't know. It says "wait for the new U2 material nearly over"..."close to finishing"..."most likely in November"..."might even be ready to debut their new material in one of the iTunes Festival gigs".

Until it's official we're still hoping. :shifty:
 
purpleoscar said:
I don't know. It says "wait for the new U2 material nearly over"..."close to finishing"..."most likely in November"..."might even be ready to debut their new material in one of the iTunes Festival gigs".



Until it's official we're still hoping. :shifty:
Click to expand...
It's the new best-case scenario!

AndrewCowley said:
Still plenty of time to bring in another producer or two.
Click to expand...
I hope not.
 
rennowba said:
What like lillywhite and eno?? [Only joking :) ]
Click to expand...

I'm really curious about what is going to be on this record. How much of the Danger Mouse material will it be composed of? Or will it be more of the recent stuff they've apparently done? Or a little bit of everything they've been screwing around with the past 5 years?

I can only guess that even if they use a lot of the DM stuff, that they will have tinkered with it quite a bit...in which case, I wonder what he'll have to say about it all, if anything? Will the DM "material" with his name on it even sound like DM?

I know everyone was ready for "new blood", but I think there's still something to be said for Brian and Danny. At least they had the gravitas, authority and history with these guys to somewhat discipline them, and they were the only producers capable of consistently getting greatness out of U2.
 
Nick66 said:
I know everyone was ready for "new blood", but I think there's still something to be said for Brian and Danny. At least they had the gravitas, authority and history with these guys to somewhat discipline them, and they were the only producers capable of consistently getting greatness out of U2.
Click to expand...

I have my own speculation on the matter.

I think NLOTH revealed that the creative relationship with them is pretty much toast. The best material was the stuff left pretty much alone (and written with E/L) like MOS and the worst material is the stuff U2 kept tinkering with late and were said to have finished last (Boots, SUC, CT) and don't have E/L writing credits.

From all reports it seems they ended up moving away from some of the original ideas. And they have a completed work (at least according to Bono) that was said to be more...downbeat or less straightforward and that has still never seen the light of day.

I sense E/L felt a little burned, especially from some of Lanois' words afterward. Considering they let them write with them and be credited, only to sandwich three crap songs in the middle of that album...this, after scaling back whatever they scaled back. Lanois was hyping the hell out of that record before he kind of got quiet about it all, even after the fact.

It's no great wonder to me, that the 4 songs that E/L did not get writing credits on were the three usual suspects and the dad-rock waltz of Breathe.

I just feel like, in the end, whatever authority E/L had over them, U2 had firmly seized it back by the time NLOTH was completed. And whatever among the interesting musical ideas they came up with, a lot of that was pushed back in favor or Will.I.Am tripe like Crazy and Boots and the dreadful SUC.

In short, NLOTH seemed like the album some of us had been waiting for - for a dozen years, and it just wasn't allowed to come to fruition. Personally, I still believe it's their best album since POP but man, 'what could have been'. That's how I read Lanois comments after the fact. He seemed disappointed.

Maybe I'm reading too much into it but I don't believe so. I feel like E/L probably feel they've done as much as they can with U2. Especially if U2 doesn't trust them as much as they used to. After all, U2 made some questionable decisions for that album, seemingly, on their own.

I'm most curious if they let Burton actually write with them. And if so, how much of that they moved away from in the end.
 
U2DMfan said:
I have my own speculation on the matter.

I think NLOTH revealed that the creative relationship with them is pretty much toast. The best material was the stuff left pretty much alone (and written with E/L) like MOS and the worst material is the stuff U2 kept tinkering with late and were said to have finished last (Boots, SUC, CT) and don't have E/L writing credits.

From all reports it seems they ended up moving away from some of the original ideas. And they have a completed work (at least according to Bono) that was said to be more...downbeat or less straightforward and that has still never seen the light of day.

I sense E/L felt a little burned, especially from some of Lanois' words afterward. Considering they let them write with them and be credited, only to sandwich three crap songs in the middle of that album...this, after scaling back whatever they scaled back. Lanois was hyping the hell out of that record before he kind of got quiet about it all, even after the fact.

It's no great wonder to me, that the 4 songs that E/L did not get writing credits on were the three usual suspects and the dad-rock waltz of Breathe.

I just feel like, in the end, whatever authority E/L had over them, U2 had firmly seized it back by the time NLOTH was completed. And whatever among the interesting musical ideas they came up with, a lot of that was pushed back in favor or Will.I.Am tripe like Crazy and Boots and the dreadful SUC.

In short, NLOTH seemed like the album some of us had been waiting for - for a dozen years, and it just wasn't allowed to come to fruition. Personally, I still believe it's their best album since POP but man, 'what could have been'. That's how I read Lanois comments after the fact. He seemed disappointed.

Maybe I'm reading too much into it but I don't believe so. I feel like E/L probably feel they've done as much as they can with U2. Especially if U2 doesn't trust them as much as they used to. After all, U2 made some questionable decisions for that album, seemingly, on their own.

I'm most curious if they let Burton actually write with them. And if so, how much of that they moved away from in the end.
Click to expand...

I pretty much agree with all of this. I'll just add that, to the extent U2 did break away and push back from E/L's original vision for the record, the music suffered for it. Of course, I can only speculate on that since we don't know what the record sounded like before they started second guessing it, but I think it's pretty safe to say that NLOTH was supposed to be a lot more ambitious than what we ended up with.

I also agree that Brian and Danny are for the most part done with U2...and U2 is probably done with them.
 
i think the dreaded "middle 3" were a panicked reaction to an all-stadium tour meant to support an album that didn't seem to have any strong/obvious singles beyond "magnificent." after 2 albums and lots of hard work in areans solidifying the fan base and reestablishing themselves after the creative and commercial disappointment of Pop, they didn't want a repeat of 1997. i don't think the middle 3 are *that* bad -- there's lots of interesting things to listen to even in SUC -- but i'm sure E/L understand that there's a lot more at stake for a band like U2 than fidelity to their original vision. however, this is a situation where (and i think Edge mentioned this cryptically in an interview) the original vision likely would have done better than the uncertain, confused album we actually got.

i don't think that's the situation here. it sounds like the quality of the material wasn't there, or at least they didn't think it was there, until recently. i don't think the DM material was in danger of getting lost in esoterica, like they may have feared NLOTH was. it just may not have been that good (more the situation with Bomb).

and if it was this hard to get to great, there may not be much left in the tank.

i'm just thankful we're getting something.
 
Irvine511 said:
but i'm sure E/L understand that there's a lot more at stake for a band like U2 than fidelity to their original vision. however, this is a situation where (and i think Edge mentioned this cryptically in an interview) the original vision likely would have done better than the uncertain, confused album we actually got.
Click to expand...

Of course. Brian and Danny are big boys, and they understand that the name of the game for a band like U2 is "radio" play and hits. But that was the name of the game on every album they worked with U2 on...so I just wish they would have trusted their instincts more instead of trying to get something out of the songs that probably wasn't there to begin with. The record probably wouldn't have sold any better under the original vision, and the tour would probably have been pretty much the same and certainly would have been as big...but we'd still (presumably) have a better record when the whole thing was done.
 
So, what's the betting U2 start acting as if an album is coming, appear at the iTunes festival for sacks of cash and new gold-plated toilets, possibly even release a single in a blaze of fanfare, and then... nothing happens? Because that definitely hasn't happened before. :happy:
 
What did Lanois say that was hinting that he was disappointed?

And: it's not only the middle 3 that are weak; none of the tunes on there are on par with their greatest achievements.

I'm not saying anything on Bomb or ATYCLB were either (except BD simply because it is a great pop tune for them and brought back "U2" to us.
 
I think U2 thinks the same thing. I'm reminded of that edge comment ("wished we'd stuck with the original idea" ... something like that) and Bono's comment that they can make a bad song sound pretty good.

I hope we get some good, in-depth interviews with the band this time around. I'm dying to know what's been going on.



Sent from
 
JOFO said:
What did Lanois say that was hinting that he was disappointed?



And: it's not only the middle 3 that are weak; none of the tunes on there are on par with their greatest achievements.



I'm not saying anything on Bomb or ATYCLB were either (except BD simply because it is a great pop tune for them and brought back "U2" to us.
Click to expand...




I'd say that the opening 4 songs are successful -- in that they sound like what they had in mind, hymns of the future. They all sound modern and attempt to be transcendent in a meditative way where the North African influence is felt and not heard.

I'd also eager that WAS, COL, and Fez are what SOA would have sounded like.


Sent from
 
Irvine511 said:
i think the dreaded "middle 3" were a panicked reaction to an all-stadium tour meant to support an album that didn't seem to have any strong/obvious singles beyond "magnificent." after 2 albums and lots of hard work in areans solidifying the fan base and reestablishing themselves after the creative and commercial disappointment of Pop, they didn't want a repeat of 1997. i don't think the middle 3 are *that* bad -- there's lots of interesting things to listen to even in SUC -- but i'm sure E/L understand that there's a lot more at stake for a band like U2 than fidelity to their original vision. however, this is a situation where (and i think Edge mentioned this cryptically in an interview) the original vision likely would have done better than the uncertain, confused album we actually got.

i don't think that's the situation here. it sounds like the quality of the material wasn't there, or at least they didn't think it was there, until recently. i don't think the DM material was in danger of getting lost in esoterica, like they may have feared NLOTH was. it just may not have been that good (more the situation with Bomb).

and if it was this hard to get to great, there may not be much left in the tank.

i'm just thankful we're getting something.
Click to expand...

That could be one way of interpreting it.

Another would be that instead of pushing out some weaker tracks, as have been done on ALL of their albums, but perhaps more obviously on the last two, U2 have decided to not release mediocre and only go for what they feel is the strongest.

This may be their last release - or at least their last BIG release. And they are also in the AB/ATYCLB territory. U2 needed to reconnect with their audience again. AB worked. ATYCLB worked. U2 need this again. This is why "Songs of Ascent" never happened. If that album was to be equivalent to a "Zooropa" (if you will), it needed a stronger parent album first. NLOTH, while absolutely brilliant at times, also had some rather weak moments. It wasn't strong enough to support a more experimental album.

If U2 can now recognize those weaker moments and remove them from consideration (if anything, save them for b-sides or special releases), then I think the delay is worthwhile.

Is it taking them longer to get there?

Naturally.

U2 are up against themselves. They don't want to repeat past successes - at least too closely. And given how many facets of their own sound U2 have already explored, it must be incredibly difficult to find something fresh, new, exciting for them and for their audience. After all, just look at some of the criticism U2 received from "Ordinary Love" and "Invisible", even though both were rather solid songs.

I hope at this point, they are now putting on some finishing touches and are ready to release this fall.

But if not, then I do think that, despite what I wrote above, you are correct. The tank is indeed "empty" - at least in the current form of what U2 are.
 
doctorwho said:
That could be one way of interpreting it.



Another would be that instead of pushing out some weaker tracks, as have been done on ALL of their albums, but perhaps more obviously on the last two, U2 have decided to not release mediocre and only go for what they feel is the strongest.



This may be their last release - or at least their last BIG release. And they are also in the AB/ATYCLB territory. U2 needed to reconnect with their audience again. AB worked. ATYCLB worked. U2 need this again. This is why "Songs of Ascent" never happened. If that album was to be equivalent to a "Zooropa" (if you will), it needed a stronger parent album first. NLOTH, while absolutely brilliant at times, also had some rather weak moments. It wasn't strong enough to support a more experimental album.



If U2 can now recognize those weaker moments and remove them from consideration (if anything, save them for b-sides or special releases), then I think the delay is worthwhile.



Is it taking them longer to get there?



Naturally.



U2 are up against themselves. They don't want to repeat past successes - at least too closely. And given how many facets of their own sound U2 have already explored, it must be incredibly difficult to find something fresh, new, exciting for them and for their audience. After all, just look at some of the criticism U2 received from "Ordinary Love" and "Invisible", even though both were rather solid songs.



I hope at this point, they are now putting on some finishing touches and are ready to release this fall.



But if not, then I do think that, despite what I wrote above, you are correct. The tank is indeed "empty" - at least in the current form of what U2 are.
Click to expand...




All good points. Hope you are right.


Sent from
 
doctorwho said:
That could be one way of interpreting it.

Another would be that instead of pushing out some weaker tracks, as have been done on ALL of their albums, but perhaps more obviously on the last two, U2 have decided to not release mediocre and only go for what they feel is the strongest.

This may be their last release - or at least their last BIG release. And they are also in the AB/ATYCLB territory. U2 needed to reconnect with their audience again. AB worked. ATYCLB worked. U2 need this again. This is why "Songs of Ascent" never happened. If that album was to be equivalent to a "Zooropa" (if you will), it needed a stronger parent album first. NLOTH, while absolutely brilliant at times, also had some rather weak moments. It wasn't strong enough to support a more experimental album.

If U2 can now recognize those weaker moments and remove them from consideration (if anything, save them for b-sides or special releases), then I think the delay is worthwhile.

Is it taking them longer to get there?

Naturally.

U2 are up against themselves. They don't want to repeat past successes - at least too closely. And given how many facets of their own sound U2 have already explored, it must be incredibly difficult to find something fresh, new, exciting for them and for their audience. After all, just look at some of the criticism U2 received from "Ordinary Love" and "Invisible", even though both were rather solid songs.

I hope at this point, they are now putting on some finishing touches and are ready to release this fall.

But if not, then I do think that, despite what I wrote above, you are correct. The tank is indeed "empty" - at least in the current form of what U2 are.
Click to expand...

Great post.

:up:
 
doctorwho said:
That could be one way of interpreting it.
Another would be that instead of pushing out some weaker tracks, as have been done on ALL of their albums, but perhaps more obviously on the last two, U2 have decided to not release mediocre and only go for what they feel is the strongest.
This may be their last release - or at least their last BIG release. And they are also in the AB/ATYCLB territory. U2 needed to reconnect with their audience again. AB worked. ATYCLB worked. U2 need this again. This is why "Songs of Ascent" never happened. If that album was to be equivalent to a "Zooropa" (if you will), it needed a stronger parent album first. NLOTH, while absolutely brilliant at times, also had some rather weak moments. It wasn't strong enough to support a more experimental album.
If U2 can now recognize those weaker moments and remove them from consideration (if anything, save them for b-sides or special releases), then I think the delay is worthwhile.
Is it taking them longer to get there?
Naturally.
U2 are up against themselves. They don't want to repeat past successes - at least too closely. And given how many facets of their own sound U2 have already explored, it must be incredibly difficult to find something fresh, new, exciting for them and for their audience. After all, just look at some of the criticism U2 received from "Ordinary Love" and "Invisible", even though both were rather solid songs.
I hope at this point, they are now putting on some finishing touches and are ready to release this fall.
But if not, then I do think that, despite what I wrote above, you are correct. The tank is indeed "empty" - at least in the current form of what U2 are.
Click to expand...
You have some great points. I do think this will be the last big release, and I'm optimistic that the (really long ass wait) is worth it.
 
prbiker15 said:
You have some great points. I do think this will be the last big release, and I'm optimistic that the (really long ass wait) is worth it.
Click to expand...

I hope so. In my experience, the longer these things take, the more people have a chance to screw around with it, tweak it and dilute it, the weaker the final product will be. And I think Bono's writers block is frankly a way bigger issue with regards to this record than anything else. It's hard for me to imagine true greatness coming out of this...but I hope I'm wrong.

My hope is kind of that they scrapped everything they did before, got some inspiration, and are now polishing of a strong set off songs. And if the earlier sessions ever see the light of day, all the better.
 
Nick66 said:
I hope so. In my experience, the longer these things take, the more people have a chance to screw around with it, tweak it and dilute it, the weaker the final product will be. And I think Bono's writers block is frankly a way bigger issue with regards to this record than anything else. It's hard for me to imagine true greatness coming out of this...but I hope I'm wrong.

My hope is kind of that they scrapped everything they did before, got some inspiration, and are now polishing of a strong set off songs. And if the earlier sessions ever see the light of day, all the better.
Click to expand...


Maybe I've not paid close enough attention, but is this supposed "writer's block" a real thing admitted by Bono? Or is it just an assumption people are having due to the long period between releases? If the former, is there a source?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

prbiker15
LP13 Discussion - Rumor Has It: Sirens, iTunes Festival, etc.
32 33 34
Replies
1K
Views
73K
kingofsorrow
kingofsorrow
salomeU2000
The Month in U2 : May 2003 *
Replies
1
Views
4K
GrIND.
G

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom