SOE FAN + industry reviews only

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
Status
Not open for further replies.
I honestly think that this is the music they want to make. Of course, I don't have a way to be sure about that. Only they know
 
CMIS said:
I honestly think that this is the music they want to make. Of course, I don't have a way to be sure about that. Only they know
Click to expand...

"I wish they made the music they want to make" = "I wish they made the music I want them to make."

I see a similar argument on other message boards for bands that have been around for awhile. But when you're that invested in a band and read every interview to mull around for intentions and what not, I think we come away with the idea that something's different in the writing process from what it was before. Or, for some, that there's a band lurking underneath that would never write tunes with catchy hooks or feature a certain style of instrumentation.... or something like that anyway.
 
So before Google went and ruined my fun, I posted a review of an old album and tried to play it off as a review of Songs of Experience...

There are songs that are better, there are songs that are worse, there are songs that'll become your favorites and others you'll probably lift the needle for when their time is due. But in the end, SONGS OF EXPERIENCE spends its four sides shading the same song in as many variations, and if on the one hand they prove the group's eternal constancy and appeal, it's on the other that you can leave the album and still feel vaguely unsatisfied, not quite brought to the peaks that this band of bands has always held out as a special prize in the past.

SONGS OF EXPERIENCE appears to take up where SONGS OF INNOCENCE left off, with U2 attempting to deal with their problems and once again slightly missing the mark. They've progressed to the other side of the extreme, wiping out one set of solutions only to be confronted with another. With few exceptions, this has meant that they've stuck close to home, doing the sort of things that come naturally, not stepping out of the realm in which they feel most comfortable. Undeniably it makes for some fine music, and it surely is a good sign to see them recording so prolifically again; but I still think that the great U2 album of their mature period is yet to come. Hopefully, SONGS OF EXPERIENCE will give them the solid footing they need to open up, and with a little horizon-expanding (perhaps honed by a few months on the road), they might even deliver it to us the next time around.

It's a review where the writer paints the album as a band relying on their past instead of experimenting and pushing their sound further, that it's nothing but the same song rewritten a bunch of different ways, it picks up where the last album leaves off rather than finding new ground, it misses the mark, unsatisfying, blah blah blah

It certainly sounds like a review of Songs of Experience. Sounds like a lot of things detractors of U2000 here say often. But it's not.

It's the original Rolling Stone(magazine) review of the Rolling Stones' (band) Exile On Main Street.

Now before anyone has a stroke, no; I am in no way comparing Songs of Experience to Exile On Main Street.

The point is this: if you like something, who gives a shit what a reviewer says? And if that something truly is great, it'll out last the poor review.

I like this album a lot. Will I feel the same way in a year? Five? Maybe, maybe not. Only time will tell.

Stop getting your damn panties in a bunch over a shitty review and just enjoy the music.

This douche blasted what is now considered one of the greatest albums of all time. If Songs of Experience is really a strong album, it'll be looked back on as such. If it's just a nice shiny thing that will lose its luster in a few months after the newness wears off, then that's what it'll be.
 
Last edited:
Headache in a Suitcase said:
So before Google went and ruined my fun, I posted a review of an old album and tried to play it off as a review of Songs of Experience...

There are songs that are better, there are songs that are worse, there are songs that'll become your favorites and others you'll probably lift the needle for when their time is due. But in the end, SONGS OF EXPERIENCE spends its four sides shading the same song in as many variations, and if on the one hand they prove the group's eternal constancy and appeal, it's on the other that you can leave the album and still feel vaguely unsatisfied, not quite brought to the peaks that this band of bands has always held out as a special prize in the past.

SONGS OF EXPERIENCE appears to take up where SONGS OF INNOCENCE left off, with U2 attempting to deal with their problems and once again slightly missing the mark. They've progressed to the other side of the extreme, wiping out one set of solutions only to be confronted with another. With few exceptions, this has meant that they've stuck close to home, doing the sort of things that come naturally, not stepping out of the realm in which they feel most comfortable. Undeniably it makes for some fine music, and it surely is a good sign to see them recording so prolifically again; but I still think that the great U2 album of their mature period is yet to come. Hopefully, SONGS OF EXPERIENCE will give them the solid footing they need to open up, and with a little horizon-expanding (perhaps honed by a few months on the road), they might even deliver it to us the next time around.

It's a review where the writer paints the album as a band relying on their past instead of experimenting and pushing their sound further, that it's nothing but the same song rewritten a bunch of different ways, it picks up where the last album leaves off rather than finding new ground, it misses the mark, unsatisfying, blah blah blah

It certainly sounds like a review of Songs of Experience. Sounds like a lot of things detractors of U2000 here say often. But it's not.

It's the original Rolling Stone(magazine) review of the Rolling Stones' (band) Exile On Main Street.

Now before anyone has a stroke, no; I am in no way comparing Songs of Experience to Exile On Main Street.

The point is this: if you like something, who gives a shit what a reviewer says? And if that something truly is great, it'll out last the poor review.

I like this album a lot. Will I feel the same way in a year? Five? Maybe, maybe not. Only time will tell.

Stop getting your damn panties in a bunch over a shitty review and just enjoy the music.

This douche blasted what is now considered one of the greatest albums of all time. If Songs of Experience is really a strong album, it'll be looked back on as such. If it's just a nice shiny thing that will loose its luster in a few months after the newness wears off, the that's what it'll be.
Click to expand...

Well played. LOL :applaud:

I think one thing we should also keep in mind, is the savaging that POP took at the time. And I would say the majority of the people here probably have POP in their top 5 albums for the band... So these reviews say more about the state of what reviewers think their audience wants to hear from them, then the actual music itself.

Enjoy the album. Still can't find a way to NOT like it, and I'm trying my best to be realistic and skeptical.
 
Headache in a Suitcase said:
So before Google went and ruined my fun, I posted a review of an old album and tried to play it off as a review of Songs of Experience...

There are songs that are better, there are songs that are worse, there are songs that'll become your favorites and others you'll probably lift the needle for when their time is due. But in the end, SONGS OF EXPERIENCE spends its four sides shading the same song in as many variations, and if on the one hand they prove the group's eternal constancy and appeal, it's on the other that you can leave the album and still feel vaguely unsatisfied, not quite brought to the peaks that this band of bands has always held out as a special prize in the past.

SONGS OF EXPERIENCE appears to take up where SONGS OF INNOCENCE left off, with U2 attempting to deal with their problems and once again slightly missing the mark. They've progressed to the other side of the extreme, wiping out one set of solutions only to be confronted with another. With few exceptions, this has meant that they've stuck close to home, doing the sort of things that come naturally, not stepping out of the realm in which they feel most comfortable. Undeniably it makes for some fine music, and it surely is a good sign to see them recording so prolifically again; but I still think that the great U2 album of their mature period is yet to come. Hopefully, SONGS OF EXPERIENCE will give them the solid footing they need to open up, and with a little horizon-expanding (perhaps honed by a few months on the road), they might even deliver it to us the next time around.

It's a review where the writer paints the album as a band relying on their past instead of experimenting and pushing their sound further, that it's nothing but the same song rewritten a bunch of different ways, it picks up where the last album leaves off rather than finding new ground, it misses the mark, unsatisfying, blah blah blah

It certainly sounds like a review of Songs of Experience. Sounds like a lot of things detractors of U2000 here say often. But it's not.

It's the original Rolling Stone(magazine) review of the Rolling Stones' (band) Exile On Main Street.

Now before anyone has a stroke, no; I am in no way comparing Songs of Experience to Exile On Main Street.

The point is this: if you like something, who gives a shit what a reviewer says? And if that something truly is great, it'll out last the poor review.

I like this album a lot. Will I feel the same way in a year? Five? Maybe, maybe not. Only time will tell.

Stop getting your damn panties in a bunch over a shitty review and just enjoy the music.

This douche blasted what is now considered one of the greatest albums of all time. If Songs of Experience is really a strong album, it'll be looked back on as such. If it's just a nice shiny thing that will loose its luster in a few months after the newness wears off, the that's what it'll be.
Click to expand...

Bravo, very well done and I completely agree with everything you've said. While I have not listened to the album yet, I read all these reviews with a grain of salt with respect to how their opinions will shape my view of the album. We all have different ears, different feelings, emotions and experiences. Why we all love these various and quite different emotive U2 songs are, for the most part, personal to deeply personal. While one "expert" or "journalist" may call this album a re-hash or a sputtering out of the band, another may hear something new or different. Critics are supposed to be polarizing, and you can guarantee some will always love their work, and some will always hate it. I, for one, am someone that always loves their work, but I am always very critical of what I love.

P.S. Here's to hoping SOE has the staying power of Exile on Main Street, what an album.
 
Lots of positive reviews from the Netherlands. Volkskrant, Algemeen Dagblad etc. Most have been posted in one of the threads earlier. U2 is also the band with the most songs in the top 1000. Tomorrow it will be U2 day on radio Veronica. People in the Netherlands still love U2. Don't let the negative cunts grind you down!!
 
KUEFC09U2 said:
Can we really call it a lukewarm reaction? Considering there are just as many positive reviews?
Click to expand...

At least at this stage it appears more positive then negative. The AV Club and NME reviews were very negative, but I almost see them as outliers, and the AV Club review was written by a food critic who seemed to be looking for any excuse to bash U2. It was not objective at all. The AV Club has also become overly obsessed with trying to be "cool".
 
Haywa1979 said:
At least at this stage it appears more positive then negative. The AV Club and NME reviews were very negative, but I almost see them as outliers, and the AV Club review was written by a food critic who seemed to be looking for any excuse to bash U2. It was not objective at all. The AV Club has also become overly obsessed with trying to be "cool".
Click to expand...

Furthermore, even the negative reviewers say SOE is an improvement compared to SOI.
 
ChurchBay said:
To be fair, he knows a lot about the band and it seems to me that those reviewers who have been self confessed admirers of the band have really taken to this album.
Click to expand...

Alexis Petridis is a solid writer and it seems he genuinely enjoys the band. He gave their Joshua Tree show in the U.K. a 5 star rating which even surprised me. This is a solid review.

Of course, it's always fun reading the comments on any U2 article in The Guardian, that can be another story...
 
rjhbonovox said:
I agree.....Love is bigger sounds more like a Killers song than Coldplay.
Click to expand...

I actually think it sounds a bit like Coldplay, it reminded me a bit of Don't Let It Break Your Heart. I suppose the long title combined with the similarity of being an upbeat anthem placed as the penultimate song just before a slow closer helped a bit in me thinking of that song.

But whereas the Coldplay song is mostly just empty grandness and noise without a good melody, Love Is Bigger has a very strong chorus and bridge, a better hook in general and isn't as static in its grandeur.
 
rennowba said:
Have spin released a review yet ?
Click to expand...

haven't seen Spin, RS, or Paste...
Still would think possible good reviews from Billboard, Sputnik music, Pretty Much Amazing, and the 3 i mention first.

If they end up getting 6 more reviews 70 or higher, they hopefully will get to a respectable number in the end.
 
Last edited:
I really liked the guardian review. Agreed with some criticisms (the best thing) and did not with others (love is bigger) but I generally see where the guy comes from. Although I like Songs of Innocence, it was self-conscious whereas this is self-aware, and that is a big difference. I would bet that, when the dust settles, even the naysayers will concede that much.
 
Last edited:
JoRu said:
I actually think it sounds a bit like Coldplay, it reminded me a bit of Don't Let It Break Your Heart. I suppose the long title combined with the similarity of being an upbeat anthem placed as the penultimate song just before a slow closer helped a bit in me thinking of that song.

But whereas the Coldplay song is mostly just empty grandness and noise without a good melody, Love Is Bigger has a very strong chorus and bridge, a better hook in general and isn't as static in its grandeur.
Click to expand...

Yeah you're right. Don't Let It Break Your Heart is an absolute mess production wise. Sounds like a bull let loose in a kitchen. The drums in particular are dire. That said it's a Coldplay song where I've always thought it sounds like them aping U2 so it always comes full circle to Bono and co. Although the verses of GOOYOW is something I can easily imagine Brandon Flowers singing.
 
BigMacPhisto said:
You sure went through a lot of effort to hit back at people that don't like SOE. Jesus. :huh:
Click to expand...
Yea, hitting find and replace sure took a whole fuck lot outta me. I was beat afterwards. Needed to take a nap.

Oh, and thanks for having the point totally woooooosh right over your head, as always.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Headache in a Suitcase
  • Locked
The Final Countdown - U2 at Sphere - General Discussion Thread Part 3
18 19 20
Replies
574
Views
26K
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase
Janet H
  • Sticky
Forum Update - We're back! Ask your questions here.
2
Replies
36
Views
3K
Popmartijn
Popmartijn
Headache in a Suitcase
  • Sticky
U2 Fans Helping Other U2 Fans Get Tickets
16 17 18
Replies
519
Views
29K
clerks
clerks
O
Better late than never “they” say…
Replies
1
Views
400
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase
Scorpionac
Songs that would fit better on SOI vs. SOE?
Replies
1
Views
449
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom