Rolling Stone & U2

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
When the fuck did they say that?!?!

I don't keep track of the interviews any more. Some recent one, last year or so I think. I'm sure somebody who pays closer attention to current day U2 can dig it up.
 
Fuck, I can't wait for the deluxe version of SoE where it just has like six new versions of U2 classics and they've decided to re-record them cos the originals were "unfinished".

Seriously. That would be so much fun to get drunk and listen to
 
You've got to let it go, Fred
You just need to fade away, Ned
I'm wide awake, Jack
I'm wide awake, Zack
I'm the widest thing to ever happen a wakefulness
I'm not sleeping, Bess
 
If it's incomplete then complete it in the heat of a concert, otherwise, fuck off. Is my attitude. In short, stop trying to rewrite history.

(Or don't, given how they managed to massacre 'Mercy' in 2009/10).

POP, for instance, was a little bit of a mess, but an inspired mess; it would not have mollified its critics merely by being fucked at a few months years more. In fact, what its critics hated about it was what it was trying to be in the first place.
 
Last edited:
This is why you ALWAYS take music critics with the smallest grain of salt.

The majority have an agenda. They either; want to desperately be friends with the artist, want to humiliate the artist, failed as an artist themselves and are bitter, desperate for street cred, or have delusions of sleeping with the artist.

I’ve always found people who rely so heavily on critics to be sad. The majority are a joke.



This might be a touch harsh, but I do agree in sentiment. I believe that being a critic for music is probably the most useless job on the planet. Music is so subjective that any review is immediately biased. At least a movie review may provide a short synopsis of the film. But I music review is useless as there is no way to ttruly write about music.

Therefore, any praise or ridicule of music that I like is worthless to me.
 
Wake Up Dead Man: "Your father, he made the world in seven, he's in charge of heaven"

This has always been one of my least favorite lines from him. There's no way to apologize for it - he's just groping for a religious rhyme and landed on one of the most uninspired ones possible.

Also "you left my heart as empty as a vacant lot" from Wild Horses - it's not an effective simile if you have to throw in a qualifying adjective to make it work.

Generally I agree with you that he has had some ridiculous and/or lazy lyrical turns on probably every album.
 
U2 has hit the same songwriting and lyrical highs post-2000 as they did previously, just not as often. I found that SOI, in particular, communicated through its lyrics a lot of personal pain, anguish and emotion that in many ways surpasses a lot of what was written in the 80s and 90s. The impact was definitely felt, as many posters have pointed out. It connected. Most of Pop, by contrast while musically adventurous, simply did not.


A lot of this is obviously subjective, but, as always, the usual suspects just want to bash anything post-2000 and claim that none of it measures up to the past. It's like a broken record played over and over and over again by the same people who have a very specific, personal, and narrow-minded view of what U2 is or should be. I feel sorry for them.
 
That's a massive list. I could never even dream of assimilating so much music in a lifetime. Ax..... could you please point out to me some bands from your list who are similar to U2's type of music or close ? I will then give them a listen.

That's because this is the kind of list that someone posts when they are absolutely desperate to be seen as someone who "knows music" and is trying to portray a certain superior aura. Always concerned about how others see him. Predictable.
 
U2 has hit the same songwriting and lyrical highs post-2000 as they did previously, just not as often.

I'm not sure anyone's disagreeing that strongly with that. It's the production, lack of confidence and, as you say, reduced success that's the key.

I wonder if they were given the time and budget of Boy, or Zooropa, what they'd produce. The talent is still there.
 
This might be a touch harsh, but I do agree in sentiment. I believe that being a critic for music is probably the most useless job on the planet. Music is so subjective that any review is immediately biased. At least a movie review may provide a short synopsis of the film. But I music review is useless as there is no way to ttruly write about music.

Therefore, any praise or ridicule of music that I like is worthless to me.

On top of that, listening to an album once or three times will hardly register with you if you plan on listening to it more than that. There's plenty of songs I was indifferent to or even hated at first, but then grew to love out of nowhere.
 
On the topic of lyrics, I'm one of those fans who found SoI to be a modest return to form for Bono--certainly, IMO mind you, his best overall output since Achtung Baby. Sure it's drenched in sincerity, but since when is that a bad thing? I suppose one can argue that by being more genuine the songs lose some of Bono's playfulness from the 90s, but glib doesn't equate to clever, and I feel he dropped the lyrical ball more times than you'd expect after reaching his zenith that is Achtung. Granted, the lyrics should fit the music, and a solid amount of his 90s output reflect that. Also, I'm not implying that his work on SoI is superlative to everything in between it and Achtung ("Stay" is gorgeous in every element), but merely in relation to the albums as a whole.

I'd also like to point out that I don't actively dislike Bono's more playful tendencies--it's certainly far more interesting in its missteps than the majority of his forthright post-POP clunkers. But flippancy doesn't satisfy me as much as a competent stab at pathos, even if the subject matter, itself, can be a cliche... I mean, life is full of cliches--we all want to love, be loved, feel inspired, etc.--and if an artist can deliver an able approach to that idea, then I'm all ears :D
 
I think he was actually talking about Streets? It was recently, on this tour sometime. I’ll see if I can find it.


Aha, cheers. :up:

Funnily enough every time he's changed a few lines of Streets live, it hasn't improved the song.

This might be a touch harsh, but I do agree in sentiment. I believe that being a critic for music is probably the most useless job on the planet. Music is so subjective that any review is immediately biased. At least a movie review may provide a short synopsis of the film. But I music review is useless as there is no way to ttruly write about music.

Therefore, any praise or ridicule of music that I like is worthless to me.

This is silly. Immediately biased? You don't say. Literally any written document reflects the bias of an author. Possessing bias does not invalidate the worth of something.

I wouldn't say music criticism is a useless job at all, not when so many album reviews have pointed me towards plenty of great music, either through their enthusiastic recommendation of an album or through mentioning other artists I'm likely to enjoy (through influence or similarity to the album being reviewed). Or, sometimes, because the reviewer bashed something but their remarks piqued my curiosity anyway.

That's because this is the kind of list that someone posts when they are absolutely desperate to be seen as someone who "knows music" and is trying to portray a certain superior aura. Always concerned about how others see him. Predictable.

You seem very concerned about coming here and bashing me. I'm not going to out with you no matter how hard to get you play.

But hey, sorry that I'm passionate about music and I have a job that allows me to listen to a lot of new albums. At least it allows me to look cool and superior on a pretty quiet forum on a marginal corner of the Internet. Lucky me.

Next you're going to mention my post count, right? Because I've got a game of troll bingo to win.

On top of that, listening to an album once or three times will hardly register with you if you plan on listening to it more than that. There's plenty of songs I was indifferent to or even hated at first, but then grew to love out of nowhere.

I definitely will pay that opinions shift over time, but to be honest my initial overall judgement doesn't shift great deal even if specific songs move up or down. I've been using Rate Your Music for over ten years, rating most albums after my first or second listen, and then later changing my rating if my opinion has changed. Barely any have shifted more than half a star; I'm not sure any have shifted more than one star. There might be a couple that have shifted a little more, but those are examples of something that when I was 18 I just loved and played heaps, but now it's a style I'm not interested in (namely, prog metal), not examples of something I over/under-rated on my first listen and by the fifth or tenth thought quite differently.
 
ECX4YVE.jpg


I hereby declare "Haywa1979=Oregoropa" to be Smooth Jimmy's 'Lock Of The Week'!
 
Last edited:
:lmao: Axver caring what people think of him hahahahaha

We've been friends for years. I've had beers with that man. He does not give one single, solitary fuck about adhering to the public consensus of cool.
 
Last edited:
U2 has hit the same songwriting and lyrical highs post-2000 as they did previously, just not as often. I found that SOI, in particular, communicated through its lyrics a lot of personal pain, anguish and emotion that in many ways surpasses a lot of what was written in the 80s and 90s. The impact was definitely felt, as many posters have pointed out. It connected. Most of Pop, by contrast while musically adventurous, simply did not.


A lot of this is obviously subjective, but, as always, the usual suspects just want to bash anything post-2000 and claim that none of it measures up to the past. It's like a broken record played over and over and over again by the same people who have a very specific, personal, and narrow-minded view of what U2 is or should be. I feel sorry for them.

:up::up::up::up:
 
:lmao: Axver caring what people think of him hahahahaha

We've been friends for years. I've had beers with that man. He does not give one single, solitary fuck about adhering to the public consensus of cool.

If you've been friends for years then I would say it's impossible for you to be objective, and you're plainly ignoring what is glaringly, almost too-painfully obvious about him. You couldn't construct a more clear example of a "musical snob" if you hired 20 scientists to sit in a lab for a year and create one.
 
Yeah, I'd much rather trust the opinion of somebody who has never met him.
 
Yeah, I'd much rather trust the opinion of somebody who has never met him.

15 years or so of posts and beating the same drum over and over and over again ad infinitum gives anyone a pretty clear sense of the person, if you're paying attention.
 
15 years or so of posts and beating the same drum over and over and over again ad infinitum gives anyone a pretty clear sense of the person, if you're paying attention.

literally half your posts are just whining about axver. he's living in your head so much that you should really start charging rent.

what's it like to be so absurdly obsessed with the internet posting habits of a total stranger you've never met before? weird, frustrating and sad i bet.
 
Last edited:
I definitely will pay that opinions shift over time, but to be honest my initial overall judgement doesn't shift great deal even if specific songs move up or down. I've been using Rate Your Music for over ten years, rating most albums after my first or second listen, and then later changing my rating if my opinion has changed. Barely any have shifted more than half a star; I'm not sure any have shifted more than one star. There might be a couple that have shifted a little more, but those are examples of something that when I was 18 I just loved and played heaps, but now it's a style I'm not interested in (namely, prog metal), not examples of something I over/under-rated on my first listen and by the fifth or tenth thought quite differently.

I agree with some of that, particularly the genre and "great deal" aspects of it. I mean, I probably won't like many country or rap albums more as time goes along since I'm not big on them to begin with. And yeah, a lot of songs my iTunes list might not shift from a one-star to five-star as time goes along (unless I only heard it once to begin with). But I'd say that opinions can still shift a bit one way or another, even if just a minor way or if you give things a chance over time.
 
Axver is from NZ and lives in Australia, and since he follows local scenes more than international ones it causes his lists to turn out that way.

Just because someone doesn't have Imagine Dragons and Drake at the top of their list, that doesn't make them a tryhard. Hell, my list looks focus grouped, which happens because I use critic and user aggregates. Tastes are shaped by time and circumstance.
 
15 years or so of posts and beating the same drum over and over and over again ad infinitum gives anyone a pretty clear sense of the person, if you're paying attention.

You've been a member for a month and devoted a significant proportion of your 37 posts to insulting me. You are a petty, small, childish individual whose true colours are very vivid indeed.

Go feed the ducks.
 
Seems like a classic case of some random bloke with absolutely nothing going on in his life posting from a darkened room and attacking someone on a forum is their idea of "living"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom