Bono: 'U2 album was too challenging' - Page 11

mcaito · 10-26-2009, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BVS

What?

I wouldn't expect a Kool-Aid® drinker to understand.

Irvine511 · 10-26-2009, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcaito

News flash to Bono.

Fans, especially smart, discerning U2 fans, can understand and appreciate "complex" music (and will buy it if they like it). And give the music-buying public at large a little more credit too, for understanding and appreciating "complex" music. The problem here is that Bono is in denial about the greatness of NLOTH, not recognizing the fine line between complex music and dull, uninteresting music. Nobody cares how high-brow and sophisticated you are, just make some good songs and people of ALL demographics and all levels of "understanding" will want to hear it (the Beatles made some complex, conceptual music). Call me simple-minded, call me low brow, but I find the much critically-maligned Rattle & Hum far more listenable than NLOTH.

Sometimes three chords and the truth is enough.

so you really like the much maligned "middle 3" of CT, GOYB, and SUC?

ultraviolet353 · 10-26-2009, 03:40 PM

U2 needs to realize that RELEVANCE is their currency. Not sales, not radio.

If they attempt to woo sales and radio as they did with Boots/Crazy/SUC they will cease being relevant, IMO. Just last night, the reference to "new songs" made me cringe. There is a tacit lack of confidence that has been sown by the lackluster reaction to the album and the songs in a live setting.

What has always set U2 apart is people come to see the new songs--they demand it. It seems less full throated this time around. Again, because I feel the songs aren't there. Even NLOTH, a song I like, doesn't sound all that great live--When I first heard that song I thought it was SURE to be the opener, and now I know why it isn't. It lacks something live.

Irvine511 · 10-26-2009, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ultraviolet353

U2 needs to realize that RELEVANCE is their currency. Not sales, not radio.

generally, in popular music, relevant music is what is selling and played on the radio.

BVS · 10-26-2009, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ultraviolet353

U2 needs to realize that RELEVANCE is their currency. Not sales, not radio.

But RELEVANCE is subjective and changes with the times as well...

For instance who would you label relevant post napster, and why?

partygirl43 · 10-26-2009, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ultraviolet353

U2 needs to realize that RELEVANCE is their currency. Not sales, not radio.

If they attempt to woo sales and radio as they did with Boots/Crazy/SUC they will cease being relevant, IMO. Just last night, the reference to "new songs" made me cringe. There is a tacit lack of confidence that has been sown by the lackluster reaction to the album and the songs in a live setting.

What has always set U2 apart is people come to see the new songs--they demand it. It seems less full throated this time around. Again, because I feel the songs aren't there. Even NLOTH, a song I like, doesn't sound all that great live--When I first heard that song I thought it was SURE to be the opener, and now I know why it isn't. It lacks something live.

THIS.

My husband and I keep talking about this...there is something about this tour that is so 'off'. I think you hit the nail on the head.

Partyslammer · 10-27-2009, 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ultraviolet353

U2 needs to realize that RELEVANCE is their currency. Not sales, not radio.

If they attempt to woo sales and radio as they did with Boots/Crazy/SUC they will cease being relevant, IMO. Just last night, the reference to "new songs" made me cringe. There is a tacit lack of confidence that has been sown by the lackluster reaction to the album and the songs in a live setting.

What has always set U2 apart is people come to see the new songs--they demand it. It seems less full throated this time around. Again, because I feel the songs aren't there. Even NLOTH, a song I like, doesn't sound all that great live--When I first heard that song I thought it was SURE to be the opener, and now I know why it isn't. It lacks something live.

I agree with this 100%. I think part of the issue with NLOTH live is where it's placed in the set bookended by a relatively slow acoustic number (SIAMYCGOO) and Elevation. But it's real problem is the live arrangement which clearly still needs work. I think it was clearly meant to be this albums' big epic "Sort of Homecoming" or "Streets" and it just isn't.

IMO, NLOTH is U2's weakest album in decades. It's being poorly received not just because of overall declining cd/record sales, but because a lot of the material just isn't that strong when matched up to most of U2's previous music. To my ears, it's a combination of over working some of the tunes and a lack of focus on the finished album as a whole. "Moment of Surrender" is the only song that holds up to U2's best music.

In many ways, all lot of this mirrors what happened with the "Pop" album and how the band struggled with some of the songs live in '97 although I'd argue Pop was and is an infinitely better album. It's just fortunate the current tour is doing so exceptionally well unlike much of the Popmart tour. However, I have noticed in some recent quips and in Bono's banter during the LA show a small level of frustration and disappointment over how the last album has been received which seems to indicate the band doesn't understand and handle negative opinions/sales very well.

I honestly can't see the band playing more than a couple songs with any regularity off No Line in future tours. "Boots" is going to go the way of "Discotheque" unfortunately in that it may only occasionally show up in dramatically reworked ways in future tours.

T.B.

Snowlock · 10-27-2009, 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Partyslammer

I honestly can't see the band playing more than a couple songs with any regularity off No Line in future tours. "Boots" is going to go the way of "Discotheque" unfortunately in that it may only occasionally show up in dramatically reworked ways in future tours.

Kind of a derail, but I've been wondering this too. Not just in the context of success or failure of NLOTH. Only history really is the final judge. I haven't been to a show, I have no desire personally to go to a stadium and see one band member at a time (in the round), so I only have bootlegs and the youtube show to go off of, but from what I've heard, none of the NLOTH songs seem to be standing out. Breathe is a soft opener and not all that well sung. Boots is cool, but well, it's Boots afterall so yeah, I agree, little staying power.

The two consistantly best performances/arrangements for me this tour are TUF and UV where typically, there's at least a couple from each new album on its respective tour I've quite liked (Vertigo/Stories for Boys, BD/The goal is soul, Please, etc).

On the album, I love NLOTH, Breathe, Crazy, and MOS but none of them are grabbing me in their live arrangements. Then again, this is the first tour I've skipped since Popmart.

I'm getting really curious about what the third/next leg will bring. If SoA does come out, how much will be performed live, will we see new arrangements, additional NLOTH songs, etc.

MrsSpringsteen · 10-27-2009, 12:43 PM

I'd like to read the entirety of what he said before making a complete judgment-but "too challenging" certainly comes across as a underestimation of fans/insult. And "grown up on a diet of popstars"..well I didn't. Maybe that is a result of coveting younger fans (for whatever reasons)-not that all younger fans have grown up on such a diet either but sometimes you reap what you sow.

Snowlock · 10-27-2009, 12:47 PM

This is a bit more accurate. Bono doesn't mention fans, he is talking about listeners of pop music. So in that respect, I'd say he's 100% correct.

"Bono said that while songs such as One or Beautiful Day weren't massive or immediate hits, he was disappointed the band didn't quite "pull off the pop songs" with the new work.

He added: "But we weren't really in that mindset and we felt that the album was a kind of an almost extinct species, and we should approach it in totality and create a mood and a feeling, and a beginning, middle and an end. And I suppose we've made a work that is a bit challenging for people who have grown up on a diet of pop stars.""

U2 'album didn't pull off hits'

Yahweh · 10-26-2009, 04:03 PM

I think yet again the article was quoted out of context. However lets state facts

1. The US market has been one of U2s weakest markets since the 1980s
2. The album has sold the 2nd most copies world wide since the start of the year
3. U2 are old and not part of the mainstream anymore, Id be shocked if they had another top radio hit it would be unexpected.

U2 should make the music they want to make and not worry about sales. If they are concerned about sales they should retire now.

nielsgov · 10-26-2009, 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yahweh

3. U2 are old and not part of the mainstream anymore, Id be shocked if they had another top radio hit it would be unexpected.

Not part of the mainstream? If you sell 3.5 million copies you are part of the mainstream.

indra · 10-26-2009, 04:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nielsgov

Not part of the mainstream? If you sell 3.5 million copies you are part of the mainstream.

ultraviolet353 · 10-26-2009, 04:10 PM

I would say relevance touches upon radio and sales, but is more of a "cultural zeitgeist" thing.

Indie music (think Pitchfork) seems to, IMO, be the most culturally relevant happening in music today. Radiohead heads the list.

BVS · 10-26-2009, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ultraviolet353

Indie music (think Pitchfork) seems to, IMO, be the most culturally relevant happening in music today. Radiohead heads the list.

I was afraid you were going to say this.

And Radiohead was already established pre-napster.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Rolling Stone Magazine's 5 star rated albums	Maoilbheannacht	Just the Bang and the Clatter	73	03-26-2009 09:59 PM
My U2 audio trade list	CTU2fan	All I Want Is U2	1	09-24-2006 07:35 PM
Because I'm bored ... the progressively growing Dabbing Huts Tour.	Axver	U2 Setlists	44	04-01-2005 03:35 AM
Essay: Faith, Hope & U2 - The Spirit of Love in U2's Music	U2Soar	The Goal Is Soul	3	09-23-2002 04:19 AM

10-26-2009, 03:40 PM	#3
ultraviolet353 Acrobat Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 482 Local Time: 05:42 PM	U2 needs to realize that RELEVANCE is their currency. Not sales, not radio. If they attempt to woo sales and radio as they did with Boots/Crazy/SUC they will cease being relevant, IMO. Just last night, the reference to "new songs" made me cringe. There is a tacit lack of confidence that has been sown by the lackluster reaction to the album and the songs in a live setting. What has always set U2 apart is people come to see the new songs--they demand it. It seems less full throated this time around. Again, because I feel the songs aren't there. Even NLOTH, a song I like, doesn't sound all that great live--When I first heard that song I thought it was SURE to be the opener, and now I know why it isn't. It lacks something live.

10-27-2009, 12:43 PM	#9
MrsSpringsteen Blue Crack Addict Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: waiting for something beautiful Posts: 19,812 Local Time: 08:42 PM	I'd like to read the entirety of what he said before making a complete judgment-but "too challenging" certainly comes across as a underestimation of fans/insult. And "grown up on a diet of popstars"..well I didn't. Maybe that is a result of coveting younger fans (for whatever reasons)-not that all younger fans have grown up on such a diet either but sometimes you reap what you sow.

10-27-2009, 12:47 PM	#10
Snowlock Refugee Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Minneapolis, MN Posts: 1,164 Local Time: 07:42 PM	This is a bit more accurate. Bono doesn't mention fans, he is talking about listeners of pop music. So in that respect, I'd say he's 100% correct. "Bono said that while songs such as One or Beautiful Day weren't massive or immediate hits, he was disappointed the band didn't quite "pull off the pop songs" with the new work. He added: "But we weren't really in that mindset and we felt that the album was a kind of an almost extinct species, and we should approach it in totality and create a mood and a feeling, and a beginning, middle and an end. And I suppose we've made a work that is a bit challenging for people who have grown up on a diet of pop stars."" U2 'album didn't pull off hits'

10-26-2009, 04:03 PM	#11
Yahweh New Yorker Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 2,947 Local Time: 01:42 AM	I think yet again the article was quoted out of context. However lets state facts 1. The US market has been one of U2s weakest markets since the 1980s 2. The album has sold the 2nd most copies world wide since the start of the year 3. U2 are old and not part of the mainstream anymore, Id be shocked if they had another top radio hit it would be unexpected. U2 should make the music they want to make and not worry about sales. If they are concerned about sales they should retire now.

10-26-2009, 04:10 PM	#14
ultraviolet353 Acrobat Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 482 Local Time: 05:42 PM	I would say relevance touches upon radio and sales, but is more of a "cultural zeitgeist" thing. Indie music (think Pitchfork) seems to, IMO, be the most culturally relevant happening in music today. Radiohead heads the list.