first time ever that U2 have had 4 singles from 1 album all go in the top4 in the charts! better than Joshus Tree, Actung Baby and even All that you Can't! i know the USA there singles are not as strong as they once were but here in UK they are stronger than ever!
U2 still massive in UK!
- Thread starter andyuk
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
tiny dancer
Blue Crack Distributor
Bono's Tart
Refugee
Well I did my bit bought all 3 versions!
Must be mad I dont even like the bloody track!!
Must be mad I dont even like the bloody track!!
mucho traffico
Acrobat
maybe they can save the sagging music scene in england & kill all the pop crap & crazy frogs
financeguy
ONE love, blood, life
Singles chart in the UK has been kind of irrelevant for years......but I would agree U2 are still doing well very there, possibly better than ever in fact.
rjhbonovox
Refugee
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2002
- Messages
- 2,139
andyuk said:
This aint anything to get excited about. The singles chart now here in the UK is virtually dead as a dodo. A single going straight in the top 5 represents a fairly low sales figure that compared to when The Joshua Tree and Achtung Baby singles were released. In my eyes it probably equates to a single going in at number 14 or 15, 15-20 years ago. Also I thought that the singles from All that you can't leave behind all went in top 4 as follows Beautiful Day number 1, Stuck in a moment number 2, Elevation went in number 3 and Walk On at number 4. I am pretty sure about the first 3 and also thought Walk On went in at number 4. Do you know this for certain?
Also a quick note about the single, I think U2 should'nt have bothered with another single release as I don't think it has done them much good, nor me either. The song is pretty average to say the least, a song that they probably could have written in their sleep. And for the diehard fans like me who have to have the singles to complete the collection, the 2 cd and 1 dvd releases had no new tracks just the same old rubbish on them. No new songs, just a very crap acoustic version of an average album track and a couple of live tracks, not much for the fan to get excited about really. To me the singles releases since 2000 have all been about screwing the fans cos they have given very little in worthwhile material on b-sides when compared to the 80's and 90's.
monkeyskin
Refugee
^Walk On reached number five, shame as if it had been number four it would have made for a nice and neat chart list.
mucho traffico
Acrobat
can they knock off the sugababes??
mucho traffico said:
At least the Sugababes kept that truely terrible thing by Robbie Williams off the top. Besides, singles charts over here haven't mattered since the masses started putting the likes of Mr Blobby or those cursed Pop Idol / Pop Star karaoke singers on top of the charts.
cobl04
45:33
Re: Re: U2 still massive in UK!
While I have been against 2000 era attacks lately, I have to agree with this. U2 were releasing singles with good quality b-sides in the 80's and 90's. Yet this time round all they have is the lead song, a live track and a different version of another song. They have enough material to release at least one b-side on a single. And what about the 2000-2010 best of (if it comes out)? Both the 80's and 90's best ofs had a second disc with b-sides.
I now definitely agree that U2 are more in for the money then they were previously. What chance do you think there would be of U2 a free show (like rock and roll stops the traffic in rattle & hum). I would say it would be a cold day in hell before that ever happens again.
And the UK charts are crap as well. Watch All because of you sink. Next week I doubt it'll be in the top 10.
Of course, if U2 toured the world like it was supposed to, all would be forgiven.
rjhbonovox said:Also a quick note about the single, I think U2 should'nt have bothered with another single release as I don't think it has done them much good, nor me either. The song is pretty average to say the least, a song that they probably could have written in their sleep. And for the diehard fans like me who have to have the singles to complete the collection, the 2 cd and 1 dvd releases had no new tracks just the same old rubbish on them. No new songs, just a very crap acoustic version of an average album track and a couple of live tracks, not much for the fan to get excited about really. To me the singles releases since 2000 have all been about screwing the fans cos they have given very little in worthwhile material on b-sides when compared to the 80's and 90's.
While I have been against 2000 era attacks lately, I have to agree with this. U2 were releasing singles with good quality b-sides in the 80's and 90's. Yet this time round all they have is the lead song, a live track and a different version of another song. They have enough material to release at least one b-side on a single. And what about the 2000-2010 best of (if it comes out)? Both the 80's and 90's best ofs had a second disc with b-sides.
I now definitely agree that U2 are more in for the money then they were previously. What chance do you think there would be of U2 a free show (like rock and roll stops the traffic in rattle & hum). I would say it would be a cold day in hell before that ever happens again.
And the UK charts are crap as well. Watch All because of you sink. Next week I doubt it'll be in the top 10.
Of course, if U2 toured the world like it was supposed to, all would be forgiven.
shaun vox
New Yorker
U2 ARE NOT IN FOR THE MONEY $$$ THEY ARE IN FOR WHAT THEY CAN BUY WITH THE MONEY$$$
Secrets!!!
Secrets!!!
typhoon
New Yorker
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2002
- Messages
- 3,021
Re: Re: Re: U2 still massive in UK!
90s B-sides disc: 50% shitty remixes.
00s B-sides disc: 100% shitty remixes?
Oh, and not all of the 2000s singles sucked. "Beautiful Day"/"Summer Rain"/"Always" was probably their last single worth buying. If U2 of today were managing that release, there's no way they'd put two new songs on the same edition. They'd split them up with a few shitty remixes for filler.
80s B-sides disc: 0% shitty remixes.COBL_04 said:
90s B-sides disc: 50% shitty remixes.
00s B-sides disc: 100% shitty remixes?
Oh, and not all of the 2000s singles sucked. "Beautiful Day"/"Summer Rain"/"Always" was probably their last single worth buying. If U2 of today were managing that release, there's no way they'd put two new songs on the same edition. They'd split them up with a few shitty remixes for filler.
rjhbonovox
Refugee
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2002
- Messages
- 2,139
Re: Re: Re: Re: U2 still massive in UK!
Agreed, Summer Rain was an excellent b-side and probably the last really great b-side, "Always" I felt was a different take on Beautiful Day which was ok as a b-side. And your spot on with the shitty remixes b-sides, I can only think of a couple really great remixes done to U2 tracks and them being "Mysterious Ways - Perfecto Mix" and The Lounge fly mix of The Fly, all the others have been goddamn awful and should never have seen the light of day. I mean does anyone on here ever listen to the "deepintheass" mix of Vertigo????? No thought not!
typhoon said:
Agreed, Summer Rain was an excellent b-side and probably the last really great b-side, "Always" I felt was a different take on Beautiful Day which was ok as a b-side. And your spot on with the shitty remixes b-sides, I can only think of a couple really great remixes done to U2 tracks and them being "Mysterious Ways - Perfecto Mix" and The Lounge fly mix of The Fly, all the others have been goddamn awful and should never have seen the light of day. I mean does anyone on here ever listen to the "deepintheass" mix of Vertigo????? No thought not!
XHendrix24
Refugee
Re: Re: Re: U2 still massive in UK!
Free show? You mean kind of like the free show they gave in NYC around the time the new album came out?
I definitely agree about the singles, though. Damnit, U2. There were probably more B-Sides in the UF era ALONE than in the 2000+ era (not counting the ones only available through that itunes Complete U2 rubbish).
COBL_04 said:
Free show? You mean kind of like the free show they gave in NYC around the time the new album came out?
I definitely agree about the singles, though. Damnit, U2. There were probably more B-Sides in the UF era ALONE than in the 2000+ era (not counting the ones only available through that itunes Complete U2 rubbish).
doctorwho
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
Complain all you want about the U.K. singles chart - it's pretty much the only country where CD singles still sell quite well! In fact, plenty of artists can get sales in the tens to hundreds of thousands. This may pale in comparison to years ago, but it's tons compared to every other country, including the U.S. This is why U2 - and many other artists - no longer have CD singles for sale in the U.S. They simply don't sell (or sell well enough to compensate for the expense).
Personally, I think for highly anticipated artists - like U2 - at least the first single should come out in the U.S. But perhaps the era of the CD single is at an end. The 45 rpm vinyl single can still be found here and there (mostly for old jukeboxes and collectors), but with the success of iTunes and similar sites, I don't think we'll have CD singles for long.
Which reminds me... Now that Eminem has an iTunes/iPod commercial, what do y'all think of that? Has he "sold out"?
Personally, I think for highly anticipated artists - like U2 - at least the first single should come out in the U.S. But perhaps the era of the CD single is at an end. The 45 rpm vinyl single can still be found here and there (mostly for old jukeboxes and collectors), but with the success of iTunes and similar sites, I don't think we'll have CD singles for long.
Which reminds me... Now that Eminem has an iTunes/iPod commercial, what do y'all think of that? Has he "sold out"?
TheQuiet1
Rock n' Roll Doggie
doctorwho said:
...You don't have U2 CD singles in the US???
babyman
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
I´m never happy when U2 hit the charts................it makes me so furious seeing
1 Beyonce
2 Eminem
3 Mariah Carey
4 -U2-
5 Sugababes
6 For hot girls
7 Five hot men
and stuff like that
It just makes me nervous, it doesn´t make sense, what must do a band like U2 (the greatest band in the world) in a chart with all those stupid..................
I wish U2 never goes in the chart.....................but the problem is that they want................and most of all they like it
U2 doesn´t need a hitparade to fill stadiums and arenas, i really wish they would do an album without any resonance at all, no interviews, no videos (or at least one where they don´t appear, a la All I want is you for example) Just one single to run in the radios for 2 weeks...........................Wouldn´t it be a great challenge for U2??
1 Beyonce
2 Eminem
3 Mariah Carey
4 -U2-
5 Sugababes
6 For hot girls
7 Five hot men
and stuff like that
It just makes me nervous, it doesn´t make sense, what must do a band like U2 (the greatest band in the world) in a chart with all those stupid..................
I wish U2 never goes in the chart.....................but the problem is that they want................and most of all they like it
U2 doesn´t need a hitparade to fill stadiums and arenas, i really wish they would do an album without any resonance at all, no interviews, no videos (or at least one where they don´t appear, a la All I want is you for example) Just one single to run in the radios for 2 weeks...........................Wouldn´t it be a great challenge for U2??
ascender_RS
Refugee
Its great to see them still being played so much on UK radio and stuff, but its a bit of a poor show that it didn't get to number 1. I don't think there's ever been a time in the UK where you can get to Number1 by selling so few records, so its not exactly a great showing for them.
Aardvark747
Blue Crack Addict
Robbie's 'Trippin' is better than ABOY
{paintedroses}
New Yorker
Aardvark747 said:Robbie's 'Trippin' is better than ABOY
Aardvark747
Blue Crack Addict
{paintedroses} said:
Re: Re: U2 still massive in UK!
All you have stated here is that less people are buying singles. regardless of how many people are buying them U2 still remain popular, that cannot be argued with!! You cannot compare the chart from the 80's to now, but you can compare the share of the people who are buying the records and from this chart position clearly U2 is on top of their game
rjhbonovox said:
This aint anything to get excited about. The singles chart now here in the UK is virtually dead as a dodo. A single going straight in the top 5 represents a fairly low sales figure that compared to when The Joshua Tree and Achtung Baby singles were released. In my eyes it probably equates to a single going in at number 14 or 15, 15-20 years ago. Also I thought that the singles from All that you can't leave behind all went in top 4 as follows Beautiful Day number 1, Stuck in a moment number 2, Elevation went in number 3 and Walk On at number 4. I am pretty sure about the first 3 and also thought Walk On went in at number 4. Do you know this for certain?
Also a quick note about the single, I think U2 should'nt have bothered with another single release as I don't think it has done them much good, nor me either. The song is pretty average to say the least, a song that they probably could have written in their sleep. And for the diehard fans like me who have to have the singles to complete the collection, the 2 cd and 1 dvd releases had no new tracks just the same old rubbish on them. No new songs, just a very crap acoustic version of an average album track and a couple of live tracks, not much for the fan to get excited about really. To me the singles releases since 2000 have all been about screwing the fans cos they have given very little in worthwhile material on b-sides when compared to the 80's and 90's.
All you have stated here is that less people are buying singles. regardless of how many people are buying them U2 still remain popular, that cannot be argued with!! You cannot compare the chart from the 80's to now, but you can compare the share of the people who are buying the records and from this chart position clearly U2 is on top of their game
yes U2 are really only in it for the money?
lets take some evidence, no CD singles in the U.S. (so begs the question HOW are they in it for "just" the money"
no promotion for ABOY here in the U.K. (surley if they where only in it for the money they would have promotoed it to death ala vertigo,)
so yep clearly looks like that are just crabbing the cash :s
lets take some evidence, no CD singles in the U.S. (so begs the question HOW are they in it for "just" the money"
no promotion for ABOY here in the U.K. (surley if they where only in it for the money they would have promotoed it to death ala vertigo,)
so yep clearly looks like that are just crabbing the cash :s
coemgen
Rock n' Roll Doggie
In a related note, HTDAAB is creeping up in the Top 100 albums on iTunes here in the U.S. It was NO. 73 last time I checked. I'm certain this is because of the new videos you can download on iTunes. U2 has had 8 in the Top 20 music videos since they debuted the new section last week!!!
Azor
Refugee
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2003
- Messages
- 2,194
Re: Re: Re: Re: U2 still massive in UK!
typhoon said:
AtomicBono
ONE love, blood, life
Re: Re: Re: Re: U2 still massive in UK!
KILT YOU!
U2 should have used some of the iTunes Rarities as b-sides. But they probably have some agreement with Apple to not, since that would limit the appeal of the boxset (though as far as I'm concerned, 400 songs for $150 is a damn good deal, if you don't already have most of them).
XHendrix24 said:
Free show? You mean kind of like the free show they gave in NYC around the time the new album came out?
KILT YOU!
U2 should have used some of the iTunes Rarities as b-sides. But they probably have some agreement with Apple to not, since that would limit the appeal of the boxset (though as far as I'm concerned, 400 songs for $150 is a damn good deal, if you don't already have most of them).
rjhbonovox
Refugee
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2002
- Messages
- 2,139
KUEFC09U2 said:
Yeah but why bother with a 4th single off this album? I could understand if they had some killer b-sides to put on it but to be blunt the b-sides are fuc#ing awful and have been for the past 2 albums. The single releases have just been about screwing the fans, like me, who like to own every single. In the past the singles were well worth having, all through the 80's and 90's U2's single releases were excellent even when they started with the fuc#in' remix lark in the 90's there were still plenty of good stuff on the singles to keep the fans happy. Now I buy the 3 singles in the UK and they are crap, played once and stored away. They don't seem to think about the fans anymore, regarding single releases anyway.
