Members Willyguitar Posted March 6, 2009 Members Share Posted March 6, 2009 I am the OP, and must say,,,,,I'll tell you when I started to take a harder look at U2.It was during the Rattle and Hum recordings during the Joshua Tree Tour. (Yes they recorded several shows, I went to this tour twice, once on the first leg in Worcester, MA, and once at Sullivan Stadium on the third leg, stood front row, center, Bono had a separated shoulder....look it up).Anyway, Bono couldn't help himself but to tell me what was wrong with America, and how we should spend more money and help abolish Aparteid in South Africa, and how Amnesty Internation should be supported, and basically what was wrong with my country.I found myself thinking (at the ripe old age of 18 or so),...."Aren't they still blowing each other up in your country? And you have the audacity to sell out concerts and take our money and tell ME what is wrong with MY country? If you don't like it, go home. As a matter of fact, why not fix your OWN country's problems before telling me what I should do to fix the world."And I kind of never got over that one. Sure I like they're later stuff. Some brilliant songs on Pop, and later stuff as well.I feel that as a long-time fan, I am entitled to say the new album sucks.Because IMO, it does.RANT OVER.Have a nice day.And if you ever get the chance to watch the Edge trying to play some blues riffs with other musicians, pass. Because it will change your outlook on things. So it seems to me that your thoughts about U2 are not entirely about this album, but actually a lot about Bono's politics and your disappointment about the Edge not being able to play blues. As I said in an earlier post, Edge has never been able to do that. He is not that kind of guitarist, and it seems strange that you consider him to be a technically brilliant musician, rather than looking at him as someone inventive, and part of a unit, who can write good songs. He was originally a guitarist in a punk band (U2's original musical roots). Playing 'blues' was the last thing they were interested in creating. Bono's politics: it would be a very sad world if we weren't all entitled to criticise politicians, publicise our views, or take a stand on something. I agree that he is irritating. But I don't think that the situation in Ireland should be seen as somehow disqualifying him from critiquing other regimes, especially as a discussion of the Irish situation (which of course you will know, being a fan), has been one of U2's lasting, earlier projects. Revist 'War' - the album. Equally, I don't think we should allow someone's decision to talk about politics affect our view of their music... unless we find their political views objectionable. He was probably right about apartheid though, and he has been more or right about Africa and a lot of other issues too, if a little misguided and naive in his approach. He is actually bit comical, and reminds me sometimes of Ricky Gervais - the self conscious idiot. As to the album. Of course, we are all entitled to our views. I like it because it has some subtleties, some unusual chord progressions and surprising turns here and there; the lyrics are interesting, and it sort of has a personality. I think the 'Boots' song is the worst song on the album, doesn't really fit, and I don't quite understand how they decided to release it as a single. I don't tend to use the word 'sucks', but if I did, I would say that I have never bought (or indeed listened to) an album that I would say 'sucks'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Ratae Corieltauvorum Posted March 6, 2009 Moderators Share Posted March 6, 2009 I would say that I have never bought (or indeed listened to) an album that I would say 'sucks'. Hmmmm, maybe we need a thread about albums that have absolutely no musical creedence whatsoever, that'd be every single track...hmmmm, off to think:confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Willyguitar Posted March 6, 2009 Members Share Posted March 6, 2009 Hmmmm, maybe we need a thread about albums that have absolutely no musical creedence whatsoever, that'd be every single track...hmmmm, off to think:confused: I am sure they are there. I have just decided to completely avoid them! Therefore, I have never listened to an album start to finish and been able to say 'that has no musical merit'. Actually, maybe that is not quite true. I was forced to listen to Mika by my lovely wife (it was painful buying it for her in the shop - the old 'this is not for me' trick had ot be used). That nearly fits the category. But even that album has one or two merits. Ie, it doesn't 'suck'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Ratae Corieltauvorum Posted March 6, 2009 Moderators Share Posted March 6, 2009 I am sure they are there. I have just decided to completely avoid them! Therefore, I have never listened to an album start to finish and been able to say 'that has no musical merit'. Actually, maybe that is not quite true. I was forced to listen to Mika by my lovely wife (it was painful buying it for her in the shop - the old 'this is not for me' trick had ot be used). That nearly fits the category. But even that album has one or two merits. Ie, it doesn't 'suck'. I'm sure at least one title by Motley Crue could be in there:idea: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Willyguitar Posted March 6, 2009 Members Share Posted March 6, 2009 I'm sure at least one title by Motley Crue could be in there:idea: There ya go - never really listened to them. I remember thinking 'Born in the USA' was pretty bad. But again, at the age of 12 or whatever I couldn't get past the title song before going back to play Jet Set Willy on my ZX Spectrum 48K. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Muddslide Posted March 6, 2009 Members Share Posted March 6, 2009 I'm not a hater, but I haven't heard anything by U2 since The Unforgettable Fire (which I think was their fourth album) that moved me at all, and a lot I actively disliked. And when I do chance to hear their early stuff these days, it just doesn't hold up for me much. Some of their more straight-ahead pop stuff is cool, but they veer way too often into "deepness, man" that gets to be like a self-parody at times. I do think Edge is interesting now and then, but it bothers me that people class him as so original and fresh and a guy who invented this particular sound when he really started out as a Keith Levine ripoff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Chill Mike D Posted March 6, 2009 Members Share Posted March 6, 2009 I, for one, am glad they collaborate with Eno and Lanois so much. Their run of Unforgettable Fire > Joshua Tree > Achtung Baby > Zooropa > Original Soundtracks 1 (which Radiohead has been milking for the past 12 years) is outstanding. This new album would be a lot stronger, in my opinion, without tracks 5,6,7, but overall I like it a lot. It's much better than the past two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members LAracer Posted March 6, 2009 Members Share Posted March 6, 2009 Well, he might not be that great of a player, but The Edge sure is smart: [YOUTUBE]MMxlrgA077g[/YOUTUBE] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members inkblot Posted March 6, 2009 Members Share Posted March 6, 2009 I, for one, am glad they collaborate with Eno and Lanois so much. Their run of Unforgettable Fire > Joshua Tree > Achtung Baby > Zooropa > Original Soundtracks 1 (which Radiohead has been milking for the past 12 years) is outstanding. This new album would be a lot stronger, in my opinion, without tracks 5,6,7, but overall I like it a lot. It's much better than the past two. I finally got to listening to the album and I agree. I like it much more than the last three. I'm glad Clayton is playing some cool basslines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members clay sails Posted March 7, 2009 Members Share Posted March 7, 2009 I finally got to listening to the album and I agree. I like it much more than the last three. I'm glad Clayton is playing some cool basslines. Really? Damn. I'm second guessing my first impression. Maybe I should give the album a few more listens before I proclaim a post mortem... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members orourke Posted March 7, 2009 Members Share Posted March 7, 2009 I'm listening to it now. I'm really liking it, but I tend to like electronica type stuff. Massive Attack, Goldfrapp, LCD Soundsystem is stuff that I go for. This is in that vein. I don't judge The Edge on his chops, yeah, I might be a better guitar player than him, but where has that gotten me. The guy is great at songs, riffs and soundscapes. It just sounds good to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Z_Zoquis Posted March 7, 2009 Members Share Posted March 7, 2009 It seems to me that if a rock star is qualified to criticise politicians, then I shouldn't have to have sold a million albums to criticise a rock band... I really hate that line of reasoning. "you don't like the new U2 record??? Well, where's all your gold records smart-ass?" - As if selling lots of albums is perfectly correlated to the quality of the music. It'd be an interesting (as in boring) world if comment was limited only to those who have had a level of success equal to that of the artist they are commenting on. Having said that I don't have any problem at all with U2 ftmp. Over the years I've really enjoyed their stuff. I'd put Joshua Tree up pretty high on the list of greatest rock albums ever and I think they've written more than their share of truly classic rock songs. I greatly dis-like Get On Your Boots. I just don't think its much of a song. If the rest of the album is in a similar vein, I doubt it'd appeal to me. They've been pretty hit and miss for me since the late eighties really and I do wish Bono would tone down the political stuff some. It's great that he's active in trying to help the down-trodden, but frankly they are a rock band, not a political party. Lets have some good rock music... As far as Edge's guitar playing goes, I couldn't be less concerned with his lack of chops (or specifically "blooze" chops). He's one of those players who has his particular angle on the instrument and thats what he does. He's learned to do what he needs to do to make the sounds he wants to make. There's no law that says a musician has to be a technical scholar. Rock music is essentially folk music - it's supposed to be open to anybody. Every once in a while the whole zeitgeist of the genre gets moved a bit too far to the technical end of the spectrum and that quality gets lost for a while, and then something like punk rock comes along to kick it's ass back in the right direction. If as a player your tastes tend to the technical end of the range you probably shouldn't bother with any of U2's stuff. Theres nothing wrong with that, I just don't think it's particularly reasonable to get all pissy becuase the Edge doesn't play the blues. The blues doesnt appeal to everybody. Neither does shred, or metal, or prog rock, or punk rock, or whatever... (it would be really interesting to hear some of the great blues players trying to play some U2 stuff. Might be kinda revealing... ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members 59refin Posted March 7, 2009 Members Share Posted March 7, 2009 Z, you'll be glad to know that are no other songs that sound like Boots on there. The song "Magnificent" to me is as good as any anthem type song on War or Joshua Tree. I'm diggin' it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members dughaze Posted March 7, 2009 Members Share Posted March 7, 2009 Don't know about the new album but sometimes U2 rocks the peeps. I love this video. [YOUTUBE][/YOUTUBE] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.