Pop coming out again?

[WinnieThePoo]

make it a double cd , like velvet underground did with thier " loaded " record , cd 1 could be the original , cd2 = remixes , mixes and stuff , it will take place 30 years from now , like star wars , ina galaxy , far , far away .....

 

[ultraviolet7]

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.

Absolutely agree.

The album is great the way it is and even if it wasn't the whole reworking idea makes absolutely no sense, as it didn't to remix the songs for Best Of. In any case if the "new" Pop sounds anything like the new mixes on Best Of, they'd better not waste their time.

POP is what it is - time to move on to something else.

 

[rjhbonovox]

Then HTDAAB is innovative I suppose? Like I said before if anyone can argue the case that tracks such as Miracle Drug, All Because Of You, Crumbs From Your Table, City Of Blinding Lights don't sound like music that they have done before then I must be listening to a different album. I remember back at the end of the 80's people used to say to me "Oh U2, they sound all the same, the same chiming guitar and you can easily tell its U2 etc" and now with the last two albums they are back to that same sound. Re-treading old ground ain't innovative and at least with POP they were trying to make music they have never made before and sound like they have never sounded before!

 

[Dalton]

Then HTDAAB is innovative I suppose? Like I said before if anyone can argue the case that tracks such as Miracle Drug, All Because Of You, Crumbs From Your Table, City Of Blinding Lights don't sound like music that they have done before then I must be listening to a different album. I remember back at the end of the 80's people used to say to me "Oh U2, they sound all the same, the same chiming guitar and you can easily tell its U2 etc" and now with the last two albums they are back to that same sound. Re-treading old ground ain't innovative and at least with POP they were trying to make music they have never made before and sound like they have never sounded before!

So your definition of "innovative" is that it sounds like music U2 has never done before?

If that is the way you are defining it then yes it is somewhat innovative. If you are saying it sounds like nothing else out there (UF and JT) you're off your rocker.

POP is a good album. Solid tunes, but innovative it is not.

 

[Lancemc]

Nobody's trying to discredit POP. The most Jick was saying was that the band isn't totally satified with the album, which I believe they aren't. Now, just because POP is so innovative, doens't mean it shouldn't be finished. I think maybe Steve Lillywhite should remaster the POP album and have the boys lay down some more guitar/vocal/bass/drum tracks if need be. Then maybe the album would be a real classic.

 

[U2girl]

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!

The rest of your post has been dealt with before in this thread but really:

I'll be up with the sun, I'm not coming down, doooooown
Let's gooo discotheque, let goooo discotheque
Miami my mammy MIAMI MY MAMMY
Mother, mooother, motheeeer

are choruses that repeat themselves as well, and are boring - apart from Gone (all choruses do that), and You've got to give it awaaay You've got to give it AWAAAAY screaming has to be the lamest U2 chorus ever.

All that this thread is missing is U2_Guy and along with bathiu and rjhbonovox the trinity of most negative 90's worshipping fans is complete (if you shout... and ponkine are their rivals). The "anything but ATYCLB, U2 after Pop is crap" shtick is getting sooo old and predictable now...why not start a U2 hate website on your own instead of flooding a FANforum?

*edit* I don't think there is any other U2 album where there were 3 single versions of songs, and 3 other songs remixed later (and that rumored Playboy Mansion remix on the alleged Hands that built America single that never happened). Makes you think...

 

[Dalton]

lol U2_Girl

I agree. How dare they write songs with structure. How dare they!

I want free form songs, and while they are at it kill the rhyming cuplet. No screw that Bono shouldn't even use real words, he should just make stuff up.


Man that would be innovative.....

 

[bcrt2000]

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

you sure like to piss off a lot dont you?

anyways, I'm a huge Pop fan, but I still realize they could have done better -- just compare the single versions of Last Night on Earth, Please, IGWSHA to the album versions, the single versions are way better; gone, mofo, and if you wear that velvet dress live are also 10 times better than the studio versions... but i think after seeing all of the single/live versions people have come to the conclusion that with the right mixes pop easily is shoulder to shoulder with achtung, but as it is now, its just a cut under, but much better than ATYCLB.. its tough to compare anything with HTDAAB yet though

 

[rjhbonovox]

Nobody's trying to discredit POP. The most Jick was saying was that the band isn't totally satified with the album, which I believe they aren't. Now, just because POP is so innovative, doens't mean it shouldn't be finished. I think maybe Steve Lillywhite should remaster the POP album and have the boys lay down some more guitar/vocal/bass/drum tracks if need be. Then maybe the album would be a real classic.

Steve Lilywhite remaster POP, Christ I hope not. I now know why HTDAAB sounds so commercialised, Lilywhite is actually producing the latest Darius album, maybe some of the sounds they made were influenced by Darius hehehehe

 

[Long]

I would only support this if the band were interested in putting some serious effort into it, not something half-assed like the new mixes on the Best of. Unfortunately, I sort of think the best time for them to have done this would have been immediately after the Popmart tour, when all the songs were in top form from being played live for a year. Now that the songs have been on the shelf for so long, I think you'd hear different versions, which may or may not be better. But I could see the essence of the originals getting lost since so much time has passed.

 

[ultraviolet7]

Then HTDAAB is innovative I suppose? Like I said before if anyone can argue the case that tracks such as Miracle Drug, All Because Of You, Crumbs From Your Table, City Of Blinding Lights don't sound like music that they have done before then I must be listening to a different album. I remember back at the end of the 80's people used to say to me "Oh U2, they sound all the same, the same chiming guitar and you can easily tell its U2 etc" and now with the last two albums they are back to that same sound. Re-treading old ground ain't innovative and at least with POP they were trying to make music they have never made before and sound like they have never sounded before!

Yes, the return of the old sound just as if the 90s had never happened doesn't make me too happy, frankly my respect for U2 is based greatly on their courage to veer off proven ground after a major success like TJT and thae fact that they were able come up with high quality innovative material as that found on AB, Zooropa and Pop. All this reworking seems as if they were trying to apologise for too much experimenting, which is obviously ridiculous. Even if the band may feel now that they should be making different music, more related to their earlier material, I don't see any reason for them not to stand by what they did in the past decade.

 

[Dalton]

Yes, the return of the old sound just as if the 90s had never happened doesn't make me too happy, frankly my respect for U2 is based greatly on their courage to veer off proven ground after a major success like TJT and thae fact that they were able come up with high quality innovative material as that found on AB, Zooropa and Pop. All this reworking seems as if they were trying to apologise for too much experimenting, which is obviously ridiculous. Even if the band may feel now that they should be making different music, more related to their earlier material, I don't see any reason for them not to stand by what they did in the past decade.

Ladies and Gentlemen, welcome to the speculation station. Here you will be treated the wild fancies of overzealous minds for less money than you would have to spend on a McDonald's happy meal.....

 

[rjhbonovox]

What?????

 

[Dalton]

What?????

Come on man, you should have loved that it was "innovative".

 

[rjhbonovox]

Hehehe nice one, I am sure into my innovative stuff.

 

[ultraviolet7]

Ladies and Gentlemen, welcome to the speculation station. Here you will be treated the wild fancies of overzealous minds for less money than you would have to spend on a McDonald's happy meal.....

My dear Dalton, if instead of trying to sound clever you read my post carefully you'd realise that I never speculated on anything, as I normally don't since I'd never bring myself to voice other people's minds, but rather what I wrote is 100% my opinion on the topic.

 

[Dalton]

All this reworking seems as if they were trying to apologise for too much experimenting, which is obviously ridiculous. Even if the band may feel now that they should be making different music, more related to their earlier material, I don't see any reason for them not to stand by what they did in the past decade.

1. "All this reworking seems as if they were trying to apologise for too much experimenting" <---- speculation.

2. "I don't see any reason for them not to stand by what they did in the past decade." I have never heard the band rip on any other album other than POP. I have never heard them say anything negative about AB, Zoo, Passengers. For whatever reason they want to distance themselves from POP. I think that is a mistake, but I also think it is unfair to say that they have tried to distance themselves from the 90's.

 

[U2girl]

The band didn't rip on any album, all they said it was unfinished - as facts have proven. Thus the reworking of songs.

Simple as that.

 

[Dalton]

The band didn't rip on any album, all they said it was unfinished - as facts have proven. Thus the reworking of songs.

Simple as that.

U2girl, is that Jackie O in your picture with bono?

 

[U2girl]

That's Ali. Picture taken from the Sweetest thing video making.

 

[rjhbonovox]

Why is is proven that its unfinished cos they have come out and said it? The band seem to be obsessed to be loved by everyone these days and cos it was a failure compared to previous albums they now say it was unfinished. If I want to listen to Bon Jovi I would go and buy there albums but there you go.

 

[U2girl]

1) When they were releasing the singles off album 3 of them had different versions to the album version. Since that doesn't happen very often with U2, the only conclusion is they felt they can do a better version of those songs - the album version felt unfinished.
2) They were still making the album when they should have been on the tour already. Rushing the unfinished album.
3) For the Best of, they remixed additional 3 songs. While U2 has plenty of dance remixes, this is not the case here, so this can not be a simple case of making the song more danceable. Again, they felt they can do better versions of the song - album version felt unfinished.
4) When there were rumors for Hands that built America single, the B-side was supposed to be Playboy mansion remix. Again, it must have felt unfinished if they were considering remixing.
5) Yes, they - definitely Bono and Larry, don't know about Adam or Edge - said so. Not a crime to try and improve one's work or change your mind on something the last time I checked. If some people claim they should know better, that's awfully presumptios. Only U2 can make final decisions on their music.

 

[Dalton]

That's Ali. Picture taken from the Sweetest thing video making.

WOW! It is earie how much she looks like a young Jackie Onasis

 

[ultraviolet7]

1. "All this reworking seems as if they were trying to apologise for too much experimenting" <---- speculation.

seems to ME = MY impression is etc, etc.

What speculation?

2. "I don't see any reason for them not to stand by what they did in the past decade." I have never heard the band rip on any other album other than POP. I have never heard them say anything negative about AB, Zoo, Passengers. For whatever reason they want to distance themselves from POP. I think that is a mistake, but I also think it is unfair to say that they have tried to distance themselves from the 90's.

I never said that "they have tried to distance themselves from the 90's" as a whole or even in particular. What I did mean to say is that even if now the ideas are different there is no reason not to stand by past work (NOT all of the 90s - basically the most experimental stuff is what's beeing questioned through all this reworking mania). This obviously makes POP the main target, though Numb off Zooropa went also into the recycling lab and an improbable song like The First Time (curiously one that represents the Zooropa idea the least) went into Best Of instead of some other more likely choice like Lemon.

 

[pepokiss]

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."

13 years old... never heard a U2 album... Only knew HMTMKMKM an One ... those 2 I knew they were from U2... My brother lend me AB and just heard the 1st half.. I liked EBTTRT and The fly.. nothing else...

I bought Pop... I LOVE POP

so don't come here generalizing with "blind worship"... cut the crap...

POP IS GOOD... whether you were a fan before or not... and if you didn't like it... well.. YOU didn't like it

that...



( between Jick and Dalton... )

 

[PowerSurge]

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

Cheers,

J

you can take back your two cents buddy, you are a troubled soul who spews nothing but negativity. God help you if you are anything like this in real life. Even when you try to make points that make sense, you come across so ignorant and full of your self it makes people sick. I've wasted enough energy on you. Thing is, you actually make me laugh....you are similar to some of the guys I've met in my life who are a sad example of human beings.

Just thought I'd give you about a thousand of my cents. After reading about a hundred or more of your posts and threads, I've just about had it with you.

Cheers,

FU


(Congratulations, I've been dragged down to your pathetic level)

 

[Lancemc]

wow, talk about negativity. It seems to just be spreading like a virus the past couple days. Where is the love?

 

[Shade]

They already remade 'POP' - with all those single mixes, and then the remixes on the 'Best Of...' album. They deleted everything that was unique about the songs and homogenized them until they sounded like sterile proto-'ATYCLB' U2 tunes. It's only my opinion, but that's the way I see it.

Like the single version of 'Please'. It maintained its energy when they performed it live, but that single version is atrocious, with the smoother bass playing and disco strings and the now-stereotypical descending U2 ending. The album version of 'Please' was raw and mean, unsympathetic, like a punch in the face, the way it needed to be. It was so unlike U2 - that's why it was an interesting song in the first place!

I hate it that they want to go back and change things that should be left as they are. I know they're not serious about it in this particular case, but it happens all the time with this band - tinkering with older songs that don't need it, when fans are just going to listen to the original recordings anyway. In a way, they're becoming the George Lucases of rock and roll. In fact, I think all further remakes should henceforth be known as the 'Greedo Shoots First' mixes.

 

[irelandwhispers]

I hate it that they want to go back and change things that should be left as they are.

This is why I'm not sure I'd like a remake of Pop. It's true that the album seems unfinished, because a lot of things could have been done better, but there are also a lot of things about it that I absolutely love. I'm afraid that if they reworked the album they'd take out all the really good stuff in order to fix the bad stuff. It's not worth it.

 

[UnforgettableLemon]

I really don't think the best of mixes compare with the changes made on the single versions of IGWSHA, Please, and LNOE. The singles had some minor structural and aesthetic changes, but still sounded like they belonged on that album. I liked the "Gone" remix on the best of, but SATS and "Discotheque" lost their soul to me. I like to put on headphones and get lost in the sounds. I think a remix somewhere between the best of and the album version for Disco might work, add the boom-chas back in, a few more layers of guitar, but leave the spacy intro. Staring at the Sun should have just been left as it was on the album.