Home› Other Music

Revisiting U2

sadprofessorsadprofessor Posts: 1,034
edited January 2007 in Other Music
Most people seem to be divided into either of two camps, the U2 apologists, and the U2 haters, and most of the time I can not help but straddle the fence.

I haven't really listened to them much in the past few years, honestly the only stuff I really truly care about is the Achtung/Zoorapa era, which is some of my favorite music ever. The early stuff just doesn't do it for me.

But I decided to listen to some of Pop today, for the first time in literally years, and I couldn't help but think how cool it would have been if they had kept progressing after that record, rather than pulling back due to the negative reviews. I know it was pretty universally derided, but looking back on it, I think its a much better record than the last two, and if they had kept pushing, they might have done something really cool, and maybe we would still be talking about that band as innovators at this point rather than middle of the road aging rock stars just doing what they do best.

But I maintain my love for Achtung Baby, that is one of my favorite records ever, I wore out my VHS copy of ZooTV live, and if I could go back in time and see only one concert, it just might have to be a Zoo TV show...

But anyway, thats just me.
The Man has a branch office in each of our brains, his corporate emblem is a white albatross, each local rep has a cover known as the Ego, and their mission in this world is Bad Shit.
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • zircona1zircona1 Posts: 293
    sadprofessor wrote:
    I wore out my VHS copy of ZooTV live, and if I could go back in time and see only one concert, it just might have to be a Zoo TV show...

    I had a VHS copy of that as well. I'm so glad it's on DVD now.

    I agree that Pop is an underrated record, it's like the bastard son of the U2 catalog. I don't think the band is very fond of it as well, I read somewhere that they wanted to go back and fix it. I think that a couple of songs could use it (If You Wear That Velvet Dress, for one) but mostly I think the whole thing is solid, I used to listen to it in the dorms my first semesters in college.
    "As long as the music's loud enough, we won't hear the world falling apart."—Jubilee

    "I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions." - George Carlin
  • keeponrockinkeeponrockin Posts: 7,446
    I just don't like the post Rattle and Hum stuff, just not nearly the passion. They just had no desire (no pun intended) and nothing to prove. I think the last record was phoned in.
    Believe me, when I was growin up, I thought the worst thing you could turn out to be was normal, So I say freaks in the most complementary way. Here's a song by a fellow freak - E.V
  • truthinesstruthiness Posts: 24
    well, for what it's worth, they are saying that they are changing direction in 2007 and are moving away from ATYCLB and HTDAAB.

    U2 is an awesome band. Different philosophy than PJ, but it's all good.
    12.9.2006 Honolulu + Klausen
  • Shawn Smith CollectiveShawn Smith Collective Posts: 986
    U2 turned into one of the best singles bands of all time...those huge, sweeping epics off of Joshua Tree are unbelievable and that continued for the band even after their sound changed completely.

    In the earlier days of Boy and War, the albums were very solid all the way through and remained very cohesive even though the styles ranged quite a bit. Something was lost for me in the big picture after Joshua Tree and later Achtung Baby, but each album has continued to produce some great songs!
    <a href="http://www.shawnsmithsinger.com">Shawn Smith</a> / <a href="http://www.thebandbrad.com">Brad</a&gt; / <a href="http://www.allhailthecrown.com">All Hail the Crown</a> / <a href="http://www.satchelpartnership.com">Satchel</a&gt;

    (Shawn Smith's official website, but not Thee Shawn Smith)
  • dharma69dharma69 Posts: 1,275
    sadprofessor wrote:
    But I decided to listen to some of Pop today, for the first time in literally years, and I couldn't help but think how cool it would have been if they had kept progressing after that record, rather than pulling back due to the negative reviews. I know it was pretty universally derided, but looking back on it, I think its a much better record than the last two, and if they had kept pushing, they might have done something really cool, and maybe we would still be talking about that band as innovators at this point rather than middle of the road aging rock stars just doing what they do best.
    I absolutely adore U2. I loved them before I did Pearl Jam but I know U2's mistakes when I hear them: Pop was their mistake. It seemed disjointed and rough and crude for them. I can take it in pieces ("Do You Feel Loved?"...yes, I do!) but I cannot abide that album as a whole. Horrible.

    For a while I used to feel a little bad for feeling a little disgusted with Pop (I mean "Mofo" has got to be the height of crap writing and production), and I thought it was just me. Something (rather several somethings) just weren't correct about the album; it all seemed so undone or under-done. Years later (I think sometime in 2004) I read an article where Bono talked about the Pop years and a particular thing about the album that was their biggest mistake: for the first time in their career they scheduled and booked the Pop tour BEFORE the album was even completed. So by the time the tour dates were approaching, whatever state the album was in, it was done; they needed to get on the road.

    And that was/is the problem with Pop that I fixed on but couldn't name: the album wasn't finished...certainly not to U2's usual standards. That's why the album is considered a failure. Not the concept...I could wholly love the concept, but they faltered in the execution.

    Yet I still love U2.
    "I'm here to see Pearl Jam."- Bono

    ...signed...the token black Pearl Jam fan.

    FaceSpace
  • normnorm Posts: 31,146
    dharma69 wrote:
    I absolutely adore U2. I loved them before I did Pearl Jam but I know U2's mistakes when I hear them: Pop was their mistake. It seemed disjointed and rough and crude for them. I can take it in pieces ("Do You Feel Loved?"...yes, I do!) but I cannot abide that album as a whole. Horrible.

    For a while I used to feel a little bad for feeling a little disgusted with Pop (I mean "Mofo" has got to be the height of crap writing and production), and I thought it was just me. Something (rather several somethings) just weren't correct about the album; it all seemed so undone or under-done. Years later (I think sometime in 2004) I read an article where Bono talked about the Pop years and a particular thing about the album that was their biggest mistake: for the first time in their career they scheduled and booked the Pop tour BEFORE the album was even completed. So by the time the tour dates were approaching, whatever state the album was in, it was done; they needed to get on the road.

    And that was/is the problem with Pop that I fixed on but couldn't name: the album wasn't finished...certainly not to U2's usual standards. That's why the album is considered a failure. Not the concept...I could wholly love the concept, but they faltered in the execution.

    Yet I still love U2.

    That's perfect. I've never been able to put into words my opinion of Pop. Yours are great.


    Thanks:D:D
  • dharma69dharma69 Posts: 1,275
    You are welcome....and now I no longer feel bad about not loving Pop ;).
    "I'm here to see Pearl Jam."- Bono

    ...signed...the token black Pearl Jam fan.

    FaceSpace
  • truthinesstruthiness Posts: 24
    dharma69 wrote:
    I absolutely adore U2. I loved them before I did Pearl Jam but I know U2's mistakes when I hear them: Pop was their mistake. It seemed disjointed and rough and crude for them. I can take it in pieces ("Do You Feel Loved?"...yes, I do!) but I cannot abide that album as a whole. Horrible.

    For a while I used to feel a little bad for feeling a little disgusted with Pop (I mean "Mofo" has got to be the height of crap writing and production), and I thought it was just me. Something (rather several somethings) just weren't correct about the album; it all seemed so undone or under-done. Years later (I think sometime in 2004) I read an article where Bono talked about the Pop years and a particular thing about the album that was their biggest mistake: for the first time in their career they scheduled and booked the Pop tour BEFORE the album was even completed. So by the time the tour dates were approaching, whatever state the album was in, it was done; they needed to get on the road.

    And that was/is the problem with Pop that I fixed on but couldn't name: the album wasn't finished...certainly not to U2's usual standards. That's why the album is considered a failure. Not the concept...I could wholly love the concept, but they faltered in the execution.

    Yet I still love U2.

    and for the record, there is talk that U2 will re-do Pop at some point in the future. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing.
    12.9.2006 Honolulu + Klausen
  • lalalalaaaaaaaalalalalaaaaaaaa Posts: 2,445
    U2 just got overexposed. I don't think their "downfall" has to do with one record in particular. We could easily be saying the same stuff about Pearl Jam right now had they not taken measures early on to avoid this. Pearl Jam has a large fanbase because of their early work. I would say 80% of hardcore Pearl Jam fans are fans because of the first 3 albums. U2 might be a little different, but I'd say their popularity developed in a similar way...you can point to 2 or 3 albums and say "this is why everyone loves U2". The difference is just the exposure...playing half time shows during football games, too many videos, too many singles, etc.
  • larslars Posts: 524
    u2 has no place here. They should be mentioned on the simple minds message pit....not here
    You can´t trust a vegetarian.
  • Bathgate66Bathgate66 Posts: 15,813
    lars wrote:
    u2 has no place here. They should be mentioned on the simple minds message pit....not here



    simple minds has a message pit ?
    :confused:


    i loved them while growing up- even went as far as seeing them at Radio City Music Hall in manhattan.

    ( alltho im no musical authority i have seen my number of shows/bands) Surprisingly one of the best live bands i've ever seen .

    Jim Kerrs voice was, at that time , very strong -and they had 2 drummers. There was the inevitable comparisons to U2, probably because of the similiar Celtic backround .
    For the ones who had a notion, a notion deep inside
    That it ain't no sin to be glad you're alive
    platessmall.jpg
    ORGAN DONATION SAVES LIVES
    http://www.UNOS.org
    Donate Organs and Save a Life
  • PoncierPoncier Posts: 16,688
    I saw Simple Minds play a club show in like 2001 at Avalon in Boston. Showed up early and nobody was near the stage, so wife and I staked out front row center spot. Kerr winked at my wife and later kicked my hand while doing a jig. Bastard. ;)
    Good band, good show. Once Upon a Time is a great album.
    This weekend we rock Portland
  • direwolf74direwolf74 Posts: 1,622
    I loved U2 growing up, and I still love them today. Unlike a lot of people here, I actually enjoyed the last two records. All That You Can't Leave Behind was a nice return to form after the monstrosity that was Pop, and Atomic Bomb was a terrific album as well. They don't have anything left to proove, so at this point they can pretty much do whatever the hell they want, and that's fine by me. Apparently Rick Rubin is producing their next album, and from what I've read so far, he's trying to get them back to the bare essentials of rock music. The latest news is that he wants the rhythm section (especially Larry's drums) higher in the mix, and he doesn't want the band to use too many overdubs or studio trickery like they have on previous records. I have a feeling this album will rock a little harder and have more of an edge (no pun intended) than anything else they've done, and I really hope that's the case. I guess we'll have to wait and see how it turns out.
    "I try my best to chug, stomp, weep, whisper, moan, wheeze, scat, blurt, rage, whine, and seduce. With my voice I can sound like a girl, the boogieman, a Theremin, a cherry bomb, a clown, a doctor, a murderer. I can be tribal. Ironic. Or disturbed. My voice is really my instrument."

    -Tom Waits
  • mrwalkerbmrwalkerb Posts: 1,015
    sadprofessor wrote:
    Most people seem to be divided into either of two camps, the U2 apologists, and the U2 haters, and most of the time I can not help but straddle the fence.

    I haven't really listened to them much in the past few years, honestly the only stuff I really truly care about is the Achtung/Zoorapa era, which is some of my favorite music ever. The early stuff just doesn't do it for me.

    But I decided to listen to some of Pop today, for the first time in literally years, and I couldn't help but think how cool it would have been if they had kept progressing after that record, rather than pulling back due to the negative reviews. I know it was pretty universally derided, but looking back on it, I think its a much better record than the last two, and if they had kept pushing, they might have done something really cool, and maybe we would still be talking about that band as innovators at this point rather than middle of the road aging rock stars just doing what they do best.

    But I maintain my love for Achtung Baby, that is one of my favorite records ever, I wore out my VHS copy of ZooTV live, and if I could go back in time and see only one concert, it just might have to be a Zoo TV show...

    But anyway, thats just me.

    I think Pop is the last great album they did, and like you said they pulled back because of negative reviews and a complete lack of sales. This lead to the complete bore of music they have released in decade since. The bottom line is the kept on in the spirit of Zooropa and Actung heading away from what people wanted them to sound like but when it didn't fly they simply went back to that. Imagine if after No Code Pearl Jam decided that they should just rerecord Ten again and again, would you still like them? Cause I for one would not be on here ever again.
    "I'm not suicidal, except when I drink. That's why we don't all drink at the same time, there'd be no-one alive to drive home..."
    Chris Cornell

    http://www.myspace.com/mrwalkerb
  • IgottagoIgottago Posts: 483
    mrwalkerb wrote:
    I think Pop is the last great album they did, and like you said they pulled back because of negative reviews and a complete lack of sales. This lead to the complete bore of music they have released in decade since. The bottom line is the kept on in the spirit of Zooropa and Actung heading away from what people wanted them to sound like but when it didn't fly they simply went back to that. Imagine if after No Code Pearl Jam decided that they should just rerecord Ten again and again, would you still like them? Cause I for one would not be on here ever again.

    Totally totally agree with you. That was my favourite U2 era. I love Pop. They were taking chances. U2 were best when taking chances. Look at Achtung, it was such a distinct sounding record and a major re-invention from what they used to be. It didn't sound like anything else being made at the time. I think All that You can't Leave Behind is a good record, but since then U2 have become a middle of the road adult contemporary band. They are no longer rock n' roll innovators, they might as well be playing to stadiums full of Oprah Winfrey fans, which they are seemingly fine with. The song with Green Day was absolute rubbish. Windows in the Sky put me to sleep. They have become an easy to swallow brand name.
  • lucylespianlucylespian Posts: 2,403
    Achtung BAby was such a spinner when it came out, such a massive contrast to the music that preceded it, and yet so good !!!!
    Jagged edges of sound all over the place, and lyrics and singing that made your hair stand on end. It amazes me how mnay younger U2 fans there are who have not even heard it.
    As for mistakes, I love them !! They show the edges of possibility and a lack of complacency. They imply movement and experimentation, and one man's mistake is another's crowning glory !!
    And bands should NEVER listen to their fans. All the great bands start out by breaking the rules of the moment, and only continue to be great if they continue to break their own rules. Fans just impose rules on teh very people they love for breaking them !!!!!!!
    Music is not a competetion.
  • LedZepFanLedZepFan Posts: 1,009
    lucylespian wrote:
    Achtung BAby was such a spinner when it came out, such a massive contrast to the music that preceded it, and yet so good !!!!
    Jagged edges of sound all over the place, and lyrics and singing that made your hair stand on end. It amazes me how mnay younger U2 fans there are who have not even heard it.


    I'm a 16 year old U2 fan. They are second only to Pearl Jam in my book. Not only have I heard Achtung Baby, but it is one of my favorite albums of all time.

    I think U2 is amazing. I do think that the last album was one of their weaker ones and I too loved the 90s albums and all the experimentation. I do really like ATYCLB but I honestly hope that we get one more really amazing album out of them.
    I've faced it, a life wasted, and I'm never going back again.

    Some die just to live.
  • keeponrockinkeeponrockin Posts: 7,446
    Seeing them live ruined it for me. I thought they were really boring. Part of it may have been I saw Aerosmith the week before, but still.
    Believe me, when I was growin up, I thought the worst thing you could turn out to be was normal, So I say freaks in the most complementary way. Here's a song by a fellow freak - E.V
  • mrwalkerbmrwalkerb Posts: 1,015
    keeponrockin wrote:
    Seeing them live ruined it for me. I thought they were really boring. Part of it may have been I saw Aerosmith the week before, but still.

    it's funny because I was still into them until I saw them play in Vancouver last year or two years ago now I guess, spring of 05, it was a good show and all but when I saw PJ again in the fall I realized how contrived the U2 shows were and that pretty much did them in for me. That being said I still do love New Years Day
    "I'm not suicidal, except when I drink. That's why we don't all drink at the same time, there'd be no-one alive to drive home..."
    Chris Cornell

    http://www.myspace.com/mrwalkerb
  • facepollutionfacepollution Posts: 6,834
    I read a recent interview where Bono said he was kind of tired of their current sound, and that their next album would be way different, either the rock had to go completely or it needed to be a lot heavier - either is cool with me so long as they do break out of their current sound. My one major gripe with them is that they take everything so seriously. They need to kind of just go back to being a band again, and make some music that isn't trying to push a political agenda. I have no issue with music and politics mixing, but it's starting to sound like the same record, and they were always so good at reinventing their sound in the past.
  • reeferchiefreeferchief Posts: 3,569
    Bathgate66 wrote:
    simple minds has a message pit ?
    :confused:


    i loved them while growing up- even went as far as seeing them at Radio City Music Hall in manhattan.

    ( alltho im no musical authority i have seen my number of shows/bands) Surprisingly one of the best live bands i've ever seen .

    Jim Kerrs voice was, at that time , very strong -and they had 2 drummers. There was the inevitable comparisons to U2, probably because of the similiar Celtic backround .

    "Dont you......... Forget about me, dont, dont dont........":D

    Happy childhood memorys.:)
    Can not be arsed with life no more.
  • reeferchiefreeferchief Posts: 3,569
    mrwalkerb wrote:
    it's funny because I was still into them until I saw them play in Vancouver last year or two years ago now I guess, spring of 05, it was a good show and all but when I saw PJ again in the fall I realized how contrived the U2 shows were and that pretty much did them in for me. That being said I still do love New Years Day

    The old music is still good for me, for all I despize the new stuff, that's testament to the fact that good music is timeless no matter what a band does afterwards.
    Can not be arsed with life no more.
  • sadprofessorsadprofessor Posts: 1,034
    facepollution wrote:
    They need to kind of just go back to being a band again, and make some music that isn't trying to push a political agenda. I have no issue with music and politics mixing, but it's starting to sound like the same record, and they were always so good at reinventing their sound in the past.
    I would contend that with Achtung, Zooropa, and Pop they achieved the perfect balance of overblown nonsense, parody, and seriousness. And then they just fell back on a formula, for no good reason whatsoever.
    The Man has a branch office in each of our brains, his corporate emblem is a white albatross, each local rep has a cover known as the Ego, and their mission in this world is Bad Shit.
Sign In or Register to comment.