Pop coming out again?

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
Z

zoology

The Fly
Joined
Aug 26, 2004
Messages
120
In USA Today there is an interesting quote from Bono -

'Larry has this project to finish the Pop album, which could have been a masterpiece with more time.'

I can foresee a double pack CD with the original album and a reworked version in the same package. But I hope they re-record and not simply remix the songs. I also hope they try and do it in the spirit of what they were trying to achieve back in 1996 and not now, otherwise it would suck!!
 
This just affirms what I thought all along, U2 aren't satisfied with POP. It doesn't matter if fans insist POP is great, that is precisely why they are called fans - because of "blind worship." If U2 would make tracks of each member farting, these blind fans would still consider it innovative, ambitious, gutsy and the antithesis of safe sound.

Whether POP is great to a fan or not is purely subjective. But what is perfectly objective information is that we know that U2 aren't satisfied with POP. Bono called it unfinished. Now Larry wants to take his turn at fixing it. Eno called it disjointed. And U2 as a whole only put 3 POP songs in the Best Of (and only 2 of out of the 5 songs off POP that were released as a single!). And all 3 songs were remixed to sound better than their originals.

I guess this closes the POP debates.

Cheers,

J
 
I also think this post doesn't belong here in PLEBA but more in EYKIW. But that's just my two cents.

Cheers,

J
 
jick said:
This just affirms what I thought all along, U2 aren't satisfied with POP. It doesn't matter if fans insist POP is great, that is precisely why they are called fans - because of "blind worship." If U2 would make tracks of each member farting, these blind fans would still consider it innovative, ambitious, gutsy and the antithesis of safe sound.

Whether POP is great to a fan or not is purely subjective. But what is perfectly objective information is that we know that U2 aren't satisfied with POP. Bono called it unfinished. Now Larry wants to take his turn at fixing it. Eno called it disjointed. And U2 as a whole only put 3 POP songs in the Best Of (and only 2 of out of the 5 songs off POP that were released as a single!). And all 3 songs were remixed to sound better than their originals.

I guess this closes the POP debates.

Cheers,




J
Click to expand...

Ok But like I have said before..U2 admit that they could have done more with POP but they have NEVER called it a CRAP ALBUM...and as I recall Jick you called POP a crap album...
I'll only believe it if U2 said it was crap but they never have...and it is not "Blind Worship"...There is a huge difference..!!!!!
 
Last edited:
It's never been a secret that they were unsatisfied with Pop. As much as I like U2 I don't need them to tell me if something is crap or not.
 
I think Pop is great. It is one of my favourite U2 albums. The remixes on the Best Of were definitely not improvements on the original songs, in my opinion. I don't know why Larry thinks Pop needs more work, but I suppose he probably feels this way because Pop wasn't as commercially successful as, say, ATYCLB. If Pop had made more money, I'm sure Larry wouldn't be saying that Pop needed more time. And, these are personal opinions, but they are not the result of my "blind worship" of everything U2 has done. If I blindly worshipped U2, I would think that ATYCLB is as good an album as POP (not that ATYCLB is a terrible album, or anything)...
 
Last edited:
Pop is one of my all time favorite U2 albums. I personally don't think it is possible to improve the album. But if they were to put something out I would buy it.
 
Pop again

I think Pop is an album where you rarely get the sense the band were in the same room or on the wavelength. I think it was a mistake to apply the techno-inspired mixing policy to the ballads and rock tunes. The first 3 tracks are fine, but If God.., Staring, Last Night.., and Gone were all improved live and on the singles (the Best of versions of Gone and Discotheque were watered down redos of the live versions, and Staring was a pointless remix). Miami is fine, Playboy could probably do with some work, Velvet Dress is badly mixed a la Exit (you can't hear some of it), Please is fine but comes across as a classic in the future versions (not here) and Dead Man could have been more powerful if it had been more alive.

There were too many ideas on the LP. Not a bad thing, but it results in an LP difficult to listen to. Pop could DEFINITELY do with being re-recorded where required or remixed where required.

Just my 2 cents!!

PS. Maybe Larry wants to redo the LP because he's not on some of the tracks, and many of the tracks were started without his input (he had a back injury). His input later on probably improved the live versions. Its interesting. If Larry had had more input on Staring would the song have developed into a mid-tempo tune (the song's real problem when it comes down to it)?
 
jick said:
It doesn't matter if fans insist POP is great, that is precisely why they are called fans - because of "blind worship."
Click to expand...
It isn't "blind worship," it's disagreement. An artist tends to be his own worst critic anyway.
 
Last edited:
Leave it alone...

It's in the past. I love it, many people like it as it is, even if it is unfinished.

Time to rite another 15 songs for the next album.
Let's get cracking for a release in September 2006 or something.



After the tour of course and a well earned rest
 
jick said:
This just affirms what I thought all along, U2 aren't satisfied with POP. It doesn't matter if fans insist POP is great, that is precisely why they are called fans - because of "blind worship." If U2 would make tracks of each member farting, these blind fans would still consider it innovative, ambitious, gutsy and the antithesis of safe sound.

Whether POP is great to a fan or not is purely subjective. But what is perfectly objective information is that we know that U2 aren't satisfied with POP. Bono called it unfinished. Now Larry wants to take his turn at fixing it. Eno called it disjointed. And U2 as a whole only put 3 POP songs in the Best Of (and only 2 of out of the 5 songs off POP that were released as a single!). And all 3 songs were remixed to sound better than their originals.

I guess this closes the POP debates.

Cheers,

J
Click to expand...

Larry is listenig to Elvis and country music, we had enought of that shit on JT and R&H... that's why I don't care about Larry's opinion... and except for Larry only Poul McG. said something about album's sales (wich BTW are much lower than those of ATYCanLB) and Adam mentioned something about "2 or 3 songs that needed more work".

This kind of thing isn't something uniqe in music world, before Pop they weren't happy with Zooropa (strange that no one remembers it now), before ATYCanLB they weren't happy with Pop, now they're saying (with HTDAAB): this is our first record, it is music we always wanted to make... in other words they're saying (as always) everything to make a new album sound (in the press) like it's better than the last one... and all bands, all artist are doing the same.
Strange that Pop was "finished" until early 2000... strange isn't it?
What's even more strange is that Mln$Hotel songs: TGBHF and Stateless are more in the spirit of Pop than ATYCanLB. (Stateless a bit more and GBHF a sort of link between the two):ohmy:


As for the POPmart... that time was the end of stadium tours (everywere, except for Europe), to this day arenas are the main places for concerts... having 80-90% of sold out tickets is NOT a failure in this case!

There is this reviewer over here, he has this theory abou U2 albums:
Boy - good
October - worse (than the last one)
War - better (than the last one)
UF - worse
JT - better
R&H - worse
AB - better
Zooropa - worse
Pop - better
ATYCanLB - worse
HTDAAB - better
.
.
(some might not agree with War->UF, but if you'll think about it for a second, War is in fact a better album, it has more great songs than UF... in fact UF has only 3 or 4 memorable tracks... there are even 2 intrumental tunes... so my vote goes to War as a better "ALBUM"))

As you can see this theory is always right.(like I said with some doubts about War->UF)


To quote the words of one of the philosophers:

"I guess this closes the POP debates.

Cheers,"

b
 
This is such crap...I have the official brochure from the Popmart tour and the band is quoted as saying they are so excited with the finished product (the Pop album) and they can't wait for the public to listen because they will love it, etc.

The whole "unfinished" thing is just an excuse everyone has made up after Pop received such crap reviews.
 
Zoocoustic said:

The whole "unfinished" thing is just an excuse everyone has made up after Pop received such crap reviews.
Click to expand...

I don't really buy into that because if you were being forced by your superiors to finish a job and sell the hell out of it, you wouldn't tell your fans and customers that you weren't happy with the finished outcome. They have mouths to feed, so of course they'd be happy with the recordings then. Their likes and dislikes can change in time just like any thing you or I may change our minds on, so I would take those quotes with a grain of salt.
 
jick said:
This just affirms what I thought all along, U2 aren't satisfied with POP. It doesn't matter if fans insist POP is great, that is precisely why they are called fans - because of "blind worship." If U2 would make tracks of each member farting, these blind fans would still consider it innovative, ambitious, gutsy and the antithesis of safe sound.

Whether POP is great to a fan or not is purely subjective. But what is perfectly objective information is that we know that U2 aren't satisfied with POP. Bono called it unfinished. Now Larry wants to take his turn at fixing it. Eno called it disjointed. And U2 as a whole only put 3 POP songs in the Best Of (and only 2 of out of the 5 songs off POP that were released as a single!). And all 3 songs were remixed to sound better than their originals.

I guess this closes the POP debates.

Cheers,

J
Click to expand...


Jick ... I know a lot of peole that became fans when they heard POP, and are still fans today. You don't have to blindly worship U2 because you like POP.
 
Perhaps a "Pop... Naked" album would be a way of closing up whatever thoughts the guys had about it not being complete enough. But it's not like the ones of us who do love Pop the way it is have to sacrifice that. If something did come out, hey, the more music, the better I'd say.
 
well i like uf a lot better than war. first half of war is very, very good but the second is really one of their less efforts.
 
jick said:
This just affirms what I thought all along, U2 aren't satisfied with POP. It doesn't matter if fans insist POP is great, that is precisely why they are called fans - because of "blind worship." If U2 would make tracks of each member farting, these blind fans would still consider it innovative, ambitious, gutsy and the antithesis of safe sound.

Whether POP is great to a fan or not is purely subjective. But what is perfectly objective information is that we know that U2 aren't satisfied with POP. Bono called it unfinished. Now Larry wants to take his turn at fixing it. Eno called it disjointed. And U2 as a whole only put 3 POP songs in the Best Of (and only 2 of out of the 5 songs off POP that were released as a single!). And all 3 songs were remixed to sound better than their originals.

I guess this closes the POP debates.

Cheers,

J
Click to expand...



Good point Jick, but you are killing your own argument as well with this thread. You are always trying to slam POP saying it was a waste, but the band obviously doesn't think so. Larry believes in it so much that he wants to finish it and Bono thinks it should have been a masterpiece.

Pop is a great album that just didn't go off on all cylinders.
 
The problem with POP stems more with how it was marketed than with how it was made. It was like intellectually U2 wanted to do a PopMart/post-modern/arty album but the songs they had were anything but that. The songs wound up being very genuine so there's a bit of a disconnect with what U2 wanted when they made the album and what U2 got when they made the album. I don't think the problem can be fixed by simply going through and "correcting" the songs. They wound up in this "mess" because they were overthinking it to begin with. Thinking about it more isn't going to help anything.

Personally I think Pop is a great album. It's just you have to ignore some of the preconceived notions that were put out marketing wise. It goes well with a 30 foot lemon and a huge olive. It doesn't go well with the largest television ever. U2 are way to genuine to even play around with pop art.
 
mystery girl said:
I think Pop is great. It is one of my favourite U2 albums. The remixes on the Best Of were definitely not improvements on the original songs, in my opinion. I don't know why Larry thinks Pop needs more work, but I suppose he probably feels this way because Pop wasn't as commercially successful as, say, ATYCLB. If Pop had made more money, I'm sure Larry wouldn't be saying that Pop needed more time. And, these are personal opinions, but they are not the result of my "blind worship" of everything U2 has done. If I blindly worshipped U2, I would think that ATYCLB is as good an album as POP (not that ATYCLB is a terrible album, or anything)...
Click to expand...

I like 6 songs off Pop (I do feel it's their weakest since AB), and I loved the remixes on the Best of. Out with the bleeps and effects, in with more guitars.

Commercial succes has nothing to do with it, we know they were still finishing the album when they should have been rehearsing for the tour already. They changed 3 songs when they were released as singles. It WAS unfinished. The band said it, the critics said it.

But yes, I can see how 90's U2 worshippers can't deal with it. I don't think they would re-release Pop, though.

Bathiu: that theory doesn't work. Not all fans would agree UF is worse than War, for example. Many fans think Zooropa is a masterpiece-on par with AB and JT. Pop and ATYCLB will always be the most controversial albums, it seems.
 
Last edited:
I think Bono was just kidding with his remark; they're not really gonna do any more to POP.
 
When I first listened to POP it did sounded a bit disjointed, I am now used to the way the album goes and personally I LOVE how it is but if Larry thinks he can make it even better I would LOVE to listen to his new version of the songs and it would be great if he had a chance to fix what he thinks is not right! :yes: :up:

By the way the band had said many times before that they wish they had more time to work on POP, this isn't news.
 
U2 needed POP. Without it, they wouldn't have the motivation to make ATYCLB, and without that, they wouldn't have made HTDAAB. It was a lesson for them how not to overthink their own style.

I don't know that remixing all the songs on Pop will make it a better album. I like 75% of the songs as is. I would lose Playboy Mansion, Miami, and Last Night on Earth.
 
Look, whether we choose to admit it or not, we all know that POP is an unfinished record. Just listen to it and it's obvious. The band has admitted that given more time it could have been a true masterpiece, but with the looming world tour ahead they just didn't get to put in those little finishing touches that make a good album great, or in this case make a great album classic.

That's how POP is. I'm not dissing it in any way, because it's acctually one of my favorite U2 albums. But no matter how much I love it, I know that it's not quite finished, and that's alright.

That being said, I think a remake of POP, possibly the proposed 2-disc remaster or whatever is an excellent idea, and would most likely give the POP album it's true skin (moreso than the disappointing Best of remixes.)
 
jick said:
This just affirms what I thought all along, U2 aren't satisfied with POP. It doesn't matter if fans insist POP is great, that is precisely why they are called fans - because of "blind worship." If U2 would make tracks of each member farting, these blind fans would still consider it innovative, ambitious, gutsy and the antithesis of safe sound.

I guess this closes the POP debates.

Cheers,

J
Click to expand...

Right Im gonna say this again and not from a blind faith devotee. POP is a great album as it is, AND it pisses all over the commercialised music that they are now putting out on their last 2 albums. There was more inventivness, creativity & excitment in that album than both of the subsequent releases. They have gone downhill since, they are no longing looking forward in music but rehashing music they have done in the past. Anyone can tell me that songs like Miracle Drug don't sound like things they have done before are the blind faith devotee fans. POP is always called unfinished by Bono and the band because it didn't sell shitloads in the good old USA and now they are running scared and creating music that the Americans will love. Gone, Discotheque, Mofo, Last Night On Earth & "YES" MIAMI are fuc#ing great tunes without having the need to boringly repeat choruses over and over to suit the singles and radio market!

There!!!!!!!
 
rjhbonovox said:


Right Im gonna say this again and not from a blind faith devotee. POP is a great album as it is, AND it pisses all over the commercialised music that they are now putting out on their last 2 albums. There was more inventivness, creativity & excitment in that album than both of the subsequent releases. They have gone downhill since, they are no longing looking forward in music but rehashing music they have done in the past. Anyone can tell me that songs like Miracle Drug don't sound like things they have done before are the blind faith devotee fans. POP is always called unfinished by Bono and the band because it didn't sell shitloads in the good old USA and now they are running scared and creating music that the Americans will love. Gone, Discotheque, Mofo, Last Night On Earth & "YES" MIAMI are fuc#ing great tunes without having the need to boringly repeat choruses over and over to suit the singles and radio market!

There!!!!!!!
Click to expand...


And I am going to say this again: POP is not very innovative. Anyone who thinks it is has limited knowledge of music history.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Reggie Thee Dog
Are we NOT discussing the Dolby Atmos Mix of Achtung Baby?
Replies
13
Views
1K
count rushmore
count rushmore
Digital Spy 2
I am back
Replies
2
Views
283
Digital Spy 2
Digital Spy 2
O
Better late than never “they” say…
Replies
1
Views
303
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase
88mph
Sphere #3 - Oct 5 - Setlist Party
2
Replies
54
Views
3K
dan_smee
dan_smee
T
Hello from a U2 guitarist in Massachusetts!
Replies
2
Views
1K
bobbvis
B

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom