pop vs. atyclb

[Lancemc]

I think that's a fair assessment Earnie. But Like you said, not all of the anti-Pop-ers here feel that way, me for example. But there's definitely some truth in what you said.

 

[Zoots]

One thing I don't - and never will - understand that sometimes (sometimes/occasionaly, not lumping you all together at all) comes from anti-Pop posts is comments about not liking it because there is obvious influences there from other styles/genres of music. WTF? I bet those same people adore the Joshua Tree and Rattle & Hum. Americana influence = OKAY, European influence = SHITE. Got it. Fuck Achtung, Zooropa and Pop, roll out BB King one more time! And using the electronic technology/influence of the time IS okay when it's Eno's synths creating a wide open space behind a song in the 80's, but is NOT okay when it's Flood or Howie B creating a traffic jam behind a song in the 90s. Got it. I'm picking this up quickly here.

Holy shit!!! Is this THE best post I have ever read on this site? Probably.

 

[U2Man]

well, you could say that atyclb sounds more european (english) than american, so i dont think the argument about where the influence comes from, is true.

 

[Zoots]

well, you could say that atyclb sounds more european (english) than american

 

[Earnie Shavers]

And what is the 'real' U2 anyway? The punk influenced early U2, the straight rock influenced early 80s U2, the atmospheric mid-80s U2, the Americana late 80's U2, the manchester early 90's U2, the electronica mid 90s U2, the heavy electro-rock late 90s U2, the melodic pop-rock early 00s U2, or the cheesetastic pop mid 00's U2?

 

[Lancemc]

The cheesetastic pop mid 00's U2 of course.

I keed, I keed, that U2's not so good.

 

[Axver]

The real U2 is the "we can't play our instruments" late 70s shambles.

 

[BVS]

Ding! Bravo.

One thing I don't - and never will - understand that sometimes (sometimes/occasionaly, not lumping you all together at all) comes from anti-Pop posts is comments about not liking it because there is obvious influences there from other styles/genres of music. WTF? I bet those same people adore the Joshua Tree and Rattle & Hum. Americana influence = OKAY, European influence = SHITE. Got it. Fuck Achtung, Zooropa and Pop, roll out BB King one more time! And using the electronic technology/influence of the time IS okay when it's Eno's synths creating a wide open space behind a song in the 80's, but is NOT okay when it's Flood or Howie B creating a traffic jam behind a song in the 90s. Got it. I'm picking this up quickly here.

I may not always agree with your post, but one thing you're usually pretty good at is backing up your posts with logic or facts. For this reason I usually enjoy your posts, but this one just reeks. For the posters that dislike ALL the 90's as your post suggest, is one of the smallest minorities in here. Disliking one album doesn't mean disliking a whole decade and it's pretty weak to make that attempt.

On that note, Pop is a good album but lacks many qualities that make it a great album...

 

[Earnie Shavers]

I wish U2 would put all of those eras into a blender and create this hybrid monster of an album.

 

[xaviMF22]

Why aren't we having HTDAAB vs. POP threads?

Oh yeah, that's because HTDAAB sucks. Even I'd pick Pop in that thread.

HTDAAB

 

[Earnie Shavers]

I may not always agree with your post, but one thing you're usually pretty good at is backing up your posts with logic or facts. For this reason I usually enjoy your posts, but this one just reeks. For the posters that dislike ALL the 90's as your post suggest, is one of the smallest minorities in here. Disliking one album doesn't mean disliking a whole decade and it's pretty weak to make that attempt.

On that note, Pop is a good album but lacks many qualities that make it a great album...

I wasn't claiming it was a large group or that if you don't like the 90s or any particular 90s album you feel that way, I specificaly aim the post at people who make those claims, and in a thread like this there'll always be a tiny handful of posts that say something along those lines, ie that (usually Zooropa and/or Passengers and/or Pop depending on the thread) are/were some crazy experimental diversion, that the band were just trying to copy the cool sound of the time etc etc, and that it wasn't the 'real' U2 but U2 lost and out of touch blah blah. Small group, tiny minority, I know. But I still don't understand that line of thinking at all, and never will. I don't see any difference between Edge one day picking up slide guitar in the 80s and going "Fuck yeah!" and Edge mucking around with a sampler in the 90s and going "Fuck yeah!"

Apologies if my post seemed to be making a sweeping comment, it wasn't.

 

[Zoots]

I wish U2 would put all of those eras into a blender and create this hybrid monster of an album.

The album title will be:

Achtung! You Can't Leave Behind An Atomic Bomb Under An Unforgettable And Blood Red Joshua Tree Fire, Boy! Just Dismantle It Or You'll Start A War in October All Over Zooropa.

 

[U2Man]

 

[Lancemc]

What does the Band-aid above my avatar stand for?

 

[BVS]

I wasn't claiming it was a large group or that if you don't like the 90s or any particular 90s album you feel that way, I specificaly aim the post at people who make those claims, and in a thread like this there'll always be a tiny handful of posts that say something along those lines, ie that (usually Zooropa and/or Passengers and/or Pop depending on the thread) are/were some crazy experimental diversion, that the band were just trying to copy the cool sound of the time etc etc, and that it wasn't the 'real' U2 but U2 lost and out of touch blah blah. Small group, tiny minority, I know. But I still don't understand that line of thinking at all, and never will. I don't see any difference between Edge one day picking up slide guitar in the 80s and going "Fuck yeah!" and Edge mucking around with a sampler in the 90s and going "Fuck yeah!"

Apologies if my post seemed to be making a sweeping comment, it wasn't.

Thanks for the clarification. I think the difference is that it's respectable to be influenced by those who came before you and it looks desperate to be influnced by current trends. Not saying that is exactly what happened, just that that is the difference in perception.

 

[U2Kitten]

OMG there's Jick posts in that one!

I miss Jick!

 

[Lancemc]

I miss Jick!

So do I.

 

[U2Kitten]

What does the Band-aid above my avatar stand for?

If you're serious: It's one of the statuses we make for reaching a certain number of posts. The name came from the band-aids in "Almost Famous".

 

[U2Kitten]

So do I.

Jick was cool I have seen people around here do much worse and insult people every day and not get banned. I think he was banned for not liking Pop.

 

[Lancemc]

Jick was cool I have seen people around here do much worse and insult people every day and not get banned. I think he was banned for not liking Pop.

I hear you. Even if his threads were just flame-bait, they were unique and interesting at least! And they inspired thoughtful discussion for the most part.

 

[Queen Bee]

I think he was banned for not liking Pop.

 

[Sicy]

Oh good lord.

 

[Lancemc]

If you're serious: It's one of the statuses we make for reaching a certain number of posts. The name came from the band-aids in "Almost Famous".

Ah, cool factoid. Thanks.

 

[Salome]

re. Mr. Shavers' comment:
I don't think people dislike POP because of the band borrowing from current trends as much that they think the entire arguement that it's a daring, innovative album and therefore most likely to be great while you can discuss whether it was daring but to call it it innovative is nonsense
people who do think the album is innovative should indeed herald Rattle & Hum for the band boldly incorporating every bit of American music history into their music ( /sarcasm)

as for U2Kitten's point that the album is being treated here like a "martyr" "some kind of unappreciated masterpiece" is also very much true
people keep harping on about hwo the band has disowned the album, but have any of you read that U2 by U2 book? I've only flicked through it, but even I noticed the band basically calls 80% of their output as 'a nice idea that never really fully developed'
even most of their classics are being referred to in that way
the reason why POP songs aren't played in concert is simply because they're not the best songs the band ever wrote and therefore the crowd reaction is also not the same as it is during other songs


more to the point / re. the original point of this thread
I really love the first 3 and the last 3 songs on POP (in a song to song comparison All that you can't ...... beats the crap out of POP though. how can people say that Do you feel loved is better than Stuck in a moment?? what's next? George Michael is better than Marvin Gaye because of more hip production?) but - quite frankly - ATYCLB is superior in so many ways that I can't see how anyone could think POP even gets close

 

[schnumi]

the reason why POP songs aren't played in concert is simply because they're not the best songs the band ever wrote and therefore the crowd reaction is also not the same as it is during other songs

See and that's a thing i will never understand and i don't really believe.

I think many many fans would love to hear Gone, Discotheque, Please etc etc from POP.

 

[U2girl]

Sweeping generalizations. Very few people dislike Pop for the influences actually, it's more to do with production (Flood and Howie B are really no competition to Eno) and the quality of songs/tracklisting/execution of ideas. U2 is, and has been, clever and good (when they pull it off) at incorporation influences into their music. But people will notice when U2 doesn't pull it off.

 

[Earnie Shavers]

but - quite frankly - ATYCLB is superior in so many ways that I can't see how anyone could think POP even gets close

Well it comes down to personal taste in music then, and what you look for in the music I guess (what you give points to). It's funny though, you use the George Michael/Marvin Gaye comparison. If I was lining those two artists up with these two albums, I'd say George Michael is ATYCLB and Marvin Gaye is Pop.

 

[Zoots]

how can people say that Do you feel loved is better than Stuck in a moment??

Very easily. It's called opinion. And it is subjective.

Do You Feel Loved has great percussion & guitars, not to mention an understated singing style & impressive falsettos from Bono esp. towards the end. All round fantastic track in my opinion, one of the best on Pop. Stuck In A Moment has a very nice melody throughout but comes off to me as a total self help cheesefest as far as the lyrics are concerned. Plus that album version makes it sound more cheesy than it is. I definitely prefer the acoustic version. Actually the Jick mix is my favorite. That said, Do You Feel Loved has a lot more plays on my itunes.

But my point is, to say that "ATYCLB is superior in so many ways that I can't see how anyone could think POP even gets close" is pretty much disregarding everyone's opinion and stating one's own opinion as fact.

 

[LemonMelon]

how can people say that Do you feel loved is better than Stuck in a moment??

Don't make me start laughing again; I just stopped yesterday from the first time the question was asked.

One more thing: If Marvin Gaye wrote songs like Stuck In A Moment on a regular basis, I would hate Marvin Gaye.

 

[jacobus]

POP

Discotheque - Beautiful Day: tie
Do You Feel Loved - Stuck in a Moment: DYFL
Mofo - Elevation (didnt have to think that one): MOFO
If God Will Send His Angels - Walk On: tie
Staring at the Sun -KITE: tie
Last Night on Earth - In A Little While: IALW
Gone - Wild Honey: GONE
MIAMI!!! - Peace on Earth: MIAMI
The Playboy Mansion - When I Look at the World: TPM
If You Wear That Velvet Dress - New York: IYWTVD
Please - Grace: tie
Wake Up Dead Man - The Ground Beneath Her Feet: WADM

POP 7 ATYCLB 1