MrsSpringsteen
Blue Crack Supplier
U2 guitarist The Edge becomes Irish citizen – after 62 years in the country
English-born David Evans, 63, is conferred with ‘long overdue’ Irish citizenship
New Album Discussion 1 - Songs of..... - Unreasonable guitar album
- Thread starter dan_smee
- 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.
Re: Bono's comments in that Rolling Stone article -
I think what he fails to realize here is that yes, the catchy hooky stuff can be really good; but something forced will always sound forced.
I also can't stand when he drones on about the evils of progressive rock. I'd argue the exact opposite; that progressive rock happens when artists have an enormous wealth of ideas. From a guy who's seemingly focused on people-pleasing, it's so awkward when he begrudges an entire genre.
I think what he fails to realize here is that yes, the catchy hooky stuff can be really good; but something forced will always sound forced.
I also can't stand when he drones on about the evils of progressive rock. I'd argue the exact opposite; that progressive rock happens when artists have an enormous wealth of ideas. From a guy who's seemingly focused on people-pleasing, it's so awkward when he begrudges an entire genre.
I'm not a fan of prog rock myself but how he can think that generic Will.I.Am/Ryan Tedder tat is better is beyond stupidity.
Last edited:
The John Tree
War Child
I think this is more a product of Bono's age and an attempt to be cool. The rise of punk was a reaction to the sometimes bloated nature of progressive rock and hard rock/heavy metal at the time, and Bono's the right age for that mentality. As a result, it's Bono's first instinct to shit on it to preserve his "punk" ethos. The world, of course, has moved on from this restrictive thinking. Young people, in particular, are less genre-bound than they've ever been and being "punk" hasn't been a sign of anti-establishment sentiment or rebellion in at least 2 generations. Nevermind the fact that U2 is the least punk "punk rock" band of all time - Bono's insistence that U2 is punk rock is a talking point he's not going to drop any time soon and is the likely root for these kind of statements.
The John Tree
War Child
We'll be lucky if they acknowledge it at all. If Pop doesn't get consideration, I don't see why NLOTH would. The 360 tour was a success because it was such a spectacle (and a great tour, in general), not because of the success of the album it was promoting.
Agree about U2 and punk rock. I think the energy of their age and rage they felt…definitely punk rock
The music they made, no way. Not with a guitar player like the Edge.
I don’t want a 60+ year old Irish band trying to recreate punk music. I also don’t want them trying to become the Beatles or Adele.
Go back to what they really are, regardless of any studio magic. But please no vocal/piano stripper down essence
The John Tree
War Child
huh?
PookaMacP
War Child
U2 guitarist The Edge becomes Irish citizen – after 62 years in the country
English-born David Evans, 63, is conferred with ‘long overdue’ Irish citizenshipwww.theguardian.com
allaras
Refugee
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2014
- Messages
- 1,256
Are you shitting on Bono for something you imagined he’d do in your head?
i do think bono truly believes in his punk rock line - and the dublin crowd they came out of was probably pretty punk rock.
but, uh, yea - they've never been punk and the only thing more cringy than when bono calls them punk rock is when he name drops celebrities mid song at concerts.
mind you - i don't care if they're friends with other celebrities. it's certainly a common thing for wealthy and famous people to be friendly with other wealthy and famous people. it's not as if celebs can just pop in to the local pub for an unbothered pint. alas...
re: the actual music...
I would argue that U2 have always been at their best when they toe the line between commercial accessibility and art. during No Line they lost the plot and weighed commercial success heavier - probably because of the massive tour they had planned (and not wanting a repeat of PopMart). what they failed to realize at the time was that they had already cemented themselves as legends and could put out whatever they wanted and people would show up.
that they've reengaged with Brian Eno says to me that they have realized that they strayed a bit too far in one direction and need to be pulled back to the line.
I hope Brian can do it, and the band is open to it. As you said, the band has always wanted to have their songs chart, but they weren't great musicians in the technical sense.
Now they seem to believe they are John & Paul crafting the perfect 3 min pop song and they've ditched the very technology they found necessary to be able to make music.
No one wants to hear The Edge play the piano or acoustic guitar. We want the creativity of the pedals, delays, sounds that worked so wonderfully with Adam and Larry's playing.
Now they seem to believe they are John & Paul crafting the perfect 3 min pop song and they've ditched the very technology they found necessary to be able to make music.
No one wants to hear The Edge play the piano or acoustic guitar. We want the creativity of the pedals, delays, sounds that worked so wonderfully with Adam and Larry's playing.
THIS.
I’m not sure they’ve realized it since but hope springs eternal… or at least until the first single drops.
i mean... they're lazy, but not stupid.
they're not bringing Brian Eno in to push for hits with the kids. martin garrix is not walking through that door. ryan tedder can't hurt you anymore.
if they wanted to go down the road of "'let's sound like the U2 people love, but try and be hip about it," they'd be wrapping up their sessions with Andrew Watt.
but they went with Eno.
i'm certainly not expecting Passengers 2 here - but i am cautiously optimistic about a return to form and a sound that is familiar yet also something we haven't heard from them before.
I don’t want to say it but it does need to be said in the context of future albums - Eno isn’t getting any younger, he’s 77. He probably doesn’t want to spend his twilight years working on a u2 album for 18-24 months. This is probably his last with the band. Hopefully they give him a full swing of it and don’t end up chopping him below the knee.
Was going to post the same thing.
Is this for real? The lack of replies to it has me wondering if I'm worried for nothing. The Edge without a new toy to play with is what's wrong with every U2 album since at least No line.
Mr Gone
Babyface
About "what they failed to realize at the time was that they had already cemented themselves as legends and could put out whatever they wanted and people would show up." . . . .
I would respectfully disagree.
Along that line of reasoning POPMART should have filled the stands instead of hosting (sometimes) empty stadiums. They had the 80's success behind their back, the reinvention and success of Achtung Baby and yes, even Zooropa. They were cemented at that point. Alas, it didn't stir up ticket sales (enough) to overcome an album that just wasn't making it (POP).
By contrast, heading into the 360 tour, they had ATYCLB & HTDAAB to invigorate the fanbase. They undersold the Vertigo tour so there was an unquenched thirst of demand, and they boasted an outrageous stage that all worked to pack stadiums in spite of poor sales for NLOTH, in complete contrast with POP/POPMART.
mikal
Blue Crack Addict
It did say ChatGPT at the bottom so I think that's a fake quote.
I'm not sure these were apples-to-apples moments in their career. Take this with a grain of salt because I didn't start my mega-fandom until 2001.
In 1997, as far as album releases go, they were less than 20 years old at that point and even less time since they were a household name (1983-84? 87?) They pulled off super-stardom and one big comeback (Achtung) from a less-than-stellar outing, but I don't think Zooropa (which benefitted from being made during a hugely successful album tour), and subsequently Passengers, were making the case for them being mainstream sweethearts like ATYCLB and HTDAAB were about to do. The thirst for a Joshua Tree repeat was still strong and having something even more out of left-field after a string of left-fielders was not as easily "forgiven" or overlooked as it would have been post-2005. POP was also yet another shift in image, entirely. Nothing about that time screamed "Even if you don't like our new album, there's something here for everyone at our shows." especially when you do the press release at a K-mart.
If anything, I think they overestimated their legendary status and the POP setback was a real gut-check for them; unfortunately one that's led them down the path of overthinking everything ever since, which leads us to...
2009 when I absolutely think they could have leaned full into experimentation and still filled stadiums because that's after the cement had dried. The craziest thing they did with their image that year was Bono wore eyeliner for like 2 minutes. Otherwise, this was U2 no matter how you slice it. You had 3 hugely successful eras under their belt in a quarter of a century.
It feels like there was a general feeling during the POP era that they had completely "lost the plot"; whereas I think conditions in 2009 would have merited much more of a "Meh, they can't all be hits" kind of response had they gone all in on experimentation and not charted well.
Mr Gone
Babyface
There are many moving parts of course so that sketchy comparisons will always be problematic, so I don't dismiss any of your points, I do have a thought on one thing you said . . .
"They pulled off super-stardom and one big comeback (Achtung) from a less-than-stellar outing . . . "
I am not sure what "less-than-stellar outing" you are referring to. The Rattle & Hum film perhaps? If so, I would counter that the album was immensely popular and carried their stardom seamlessly up to and through Achtung Baby and ZOO TV. AB, to me, wasn't a comeback, just a reinvention that worked and continued the superstardom the band achieved with JT. That period of JT/AB to this day are lauded as U2's peak period. Zooropa was not a massive hit maker, but it did win a Grammy, which didn't hurt.
"I think they overestimated their legendary status and the POP setback was a real gut-check for them"
I do agree wholeheartedly with this. They discovered that they weren't as big as the Rolling Stones in that they could put out a meh album yet pack stadiums regardless . . . . . until they did exactly that with the 360 tour, for the reasons I suggested, and the reasons you offered as well. It was a perfect storm for them that year and I think they may never return to the stadiums again and let that particular tour stand as the perfect ending to their stadium ventures.
It's all arenas and perhaps a return to the Sphere from here. Which is fine. Though I am in the minority that loves the huge, packed outdoor stadium shows. But that's a different and well worn discussion in and of itself.
I could be misunderstanding or misinterpreting the whole R&H thing, but I feel like they've talked about it in documentaries as if it was a pretty big (obviously not to the degree of POP or the iTunes mishap) misstep that warranted the whole reinvention effort leading to AB. I'll give you "comeback" is probably too dramatic of a word for it.
Mr Gone
Babyface
Indeed. I should have specified stadium tours in support of a new album (which is what I had in mind).
Yes, I could see a greatest hits type tour selling out stadiums should they decide to go that route.
It will be interesting to see what kind of tour they put together whenever the new album is released. I don't know how much mileage Larry has left, so maybe this next tour will be their last. But somehow I can't imagine they would do a greatest hits tour vs a tour that supports the new album.
Perhaps it all boils down to how popular the new material turns out to be with general audiences.
Similar threads
- Locked
