Author Topic: People on this forum have overblown POP  (Read 4066 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline THRILLHO

  • Holy Joe
  • ***
  • Posts: 17,124
  • The sun won't melt our wings tonight
Re: People on this forum have overblown POP
« Reply #15 on: July 18, 2017, 12:26:19 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
visitors can't see pics , please You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login or You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


A coke with that?

yes thank you. this is why you're tops.

Offline Edgematic

  • Wanderer
  • *
  • Posts: 90
Re: People on this forum have overblown POP
« Reply #16 on: July 18, 2017, 12:35:37 PM »
People who like POP like it (as well as AB and Zooropa) because they like the songs, and there's pretty solid evidence that those songs were created through an effort by U2 to push their limits and experiment.  POP fans see a strong correlation between U2's adventurous spirit from 1984-1997 with them writing good songs.  That adventurous spirit flagged after 1997, and that correlates with lower quality of music, generally speaking. 

NLOTH was half-heartedly "adventurous", but the songs weren't very good.  That's why people who like POP, for the most part, aren't agog over NLOTH.  They like the songs, first and foremost. The rest is secondary.   

Also, POP was no more derivative of modern musical trends than AB, which took its cues from industrial and club music of 1989-1990 Europe, or a song like "Vertigo" which was clearly a reaction to the renewed Garage Rock movement in early 2000s America (i.e. The Strokes/ The Killers).  I reject the premise, however, that absorbing outside musical trends is inherently bad.  Every successful band has done it, most famously the Beatles filtering Dylan and Brian Wilson, in "Rubber Soul" and "Revolver", respectively. 

« Last Edit: July 18, 2017, 12:43:45 PM by Edgematic »

Online an tha

  • Airborne Ranger
  • ***
  • Posts: 9,383
  • You can swallow, or you can spit.
Re: People on this forum have overblown POP
« Reply #17 on: July 18, 2017, 12:51:30 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


What the hell do you want them to do? Make good music you like or make absolutely sh**e music, that has a passage in one song that you deem to be "artistic" and "adventurous"

Why do the two things have to be mutually exclusive?



They don't but, I've been reading this forum for years and as far as I can see, there is a lot of snobbery in relation to their music.

Take their last album for example.
Raised By Wolves, California are two great songs. Nothing complicated, nothing "adventurous" yet, they're two top class songs.
EBW is another top class song, evident by the performances either with solo piano or string sections. Again, nothing too adventurous in terms of the structure, melody or arrangement.

Yet, all I've read is major criticism of those songs and that album on here. And the common theme is, it's not artistic, adventurous and experimental enough.

It's mind blowing. I get the impression some on here go out and buy a record and instead of basically either enjoying it or not, some of you sit there, scratching your chin and think, "Hmmm yes, that little grace note on bar 56 reminds me of an incident but, the rest is mediocre. Not good enough for me"

Case in point, The Little Things...As soon as I heard that song, it hit me! It's a beautifully crafted song, with hard hitting lyrics that hit home with me and certain issues I've had for some time. However, I'm also a musician and I didn't sit down and analyse it bar by bar. I didn't look down on it because it didn't introduce an experimental rap with a phase effect on the vocal. I either liked it or I didn't!

Unless you're the creator, that's what music should be about as a listener!
Imagine going for a pint and having a conversation about U2....

"So I see U2 released an album there last week"
"Yeah, I bought it..."
"What ya think? Any good?"
"Well, there are "good" songs on it but, from an artistic point of view, I think it needs to be more experimental in a wider sense and tackle the musical restraints of the 21st century"
".......................................Might wanna lay off the booze mate"

Cracking post and exactly the kind that aids reasoned and interesting discussion.

You are dead on in agreeing they don't have to be mutually exclusive...

Using the examples you name from SOI - RBW - to me I agree this is a good song, the main reason i like it personally is that it deals with challenging subject matter and is interesting lyrically....it does not push any sonic boundaries as such really (although it does in a subtle manner) but it does not need to do so for me to like it.....it is for me an interesting song, well put together and is certainly not fluffy 'pop rock' u2 to me.

California - now we disagree, this to me is exactly the kind of 'knock out in their sleep' MOR u2 i just can't stand - it's platitude packed lyrics full of cliches about love etc just bores me - it is to me (that is the key phrase TO ME) just so beige....I don't like it lyrically or sonically.

EBW - could be a belter but it (again) for me suffers from having this pop veneer applied to it that i find sickly sweet and which i find sucks the emotional impact/feel out of the song.

The whole thing isn't always about experimental meaning good or non experimental meaning bad and it is my view that people here including myself who are vocal about u2's more recent output are usually pretty fair and express their thoughts because they care and because they feel a u2 forum is a place where they can do so candidly....

I can only speak for myself but i will always try and back up my view with as reasoned an argument as my limited intelligence allows and will take on board others views too and try to discuss fairly, openly and respectfully.

It is my view that some of the self appointed 'positive' people don't always do the same but like to point out it is the what they deem 'negative' people who are guilty of not being balanced or reasoned.....most of the time the balance is there to be fair from both 'sides' (for want of a better phrase) of course i can also see how mega fans of a band can be very sensitive about any criticism of the band...

Ultimately it all boils down to individual taste and opinion - it isn't always open and shut and there are many shades to the discussion - the one big thing i always come back to is that i believe u2 have always been better when they are working shall we say in the less obvious places.

I believe strongly that u2 generally make great alternative rock/more ambient songs and largely not very good or bad straight up rock/pop rock songs.

That is just me and my view though....

Offline Johnny Feathers

  • Elevated
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,783
Re: People on this forum have overblown POP
« Reply #18 on: July 18, 2017, 01:13:11 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


What the hell do you want them to do? Make good music you like or make absolutely sh**e music, that has a passage in one song that you deem to be "artistic" and "adventurous"

Why do the two things have to be mutually exclusive?



They don't but, I've been reading this forum for years and as far as I can see, there is a lot of snobbery in relation to their music.

Take their last album for example.
Raised By Wolves, California are two great songs. Nothing complicated, nothing "adventurous" yet, they're two top class songs.
EBW is another top class song, evident by the performances either with solo piano or string sections. Again, nothing too adventurous in terms of the structure, melody or arrangement.

Yet, all I've read is major criticism of those songs and that album on here. And the common theme is, it's not artistic, adventurous and experimental enough.

It's mind blowing. I get the impression some on here go out and buy a record and instead of basically either enjoying it or not, some of you sit there, scratching your chin and think, "Hmmm yes, that little grace note on bar 56 reminds me of an incident but, the rest is mediocre. Not good enough for me"

Case in point, The Little Things...As soon as I heard that song, it hit me! It's a beautifully crafted song, with hard hitting lyrics that hit home with me and certain issues I've had for some time. However, I'm also a musician and I didn't sit down and analyse it bar by bar. I didn't look down on it because it didn't introduce an experimental rap with a phase effect on the vocal. I either liked it or I didn't!

Unless you're the creator, that's what music should be about as a listener!
Imagine going for a pint and having a conversation about U2....

"So I see U2 released an album there last week"
"Yeah, I bought it..."
"What ya think? Any good?"
"Well, there are "good" songs on it but, from an artistic point of view, I think it needs to be more experimental in a wider sense and tackle the musical restraints of the 21st century"
".......................................Might wanna lay off the booze mate"

Coming from a guy who's already taken issue with what seems like overly-negative fans today, this seems equally egregious to me.  "California's a good song"....well ok.  I guess there's no more need to discuss it then?  You just determine what's "good", and we all go along with it?  I'm glad those songs worked for you, I truly am.  But there's no reason why they therefore have to work for anyone else. 

Offline The Exile

  • Up With the Sun
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,076
  • Been around the back, Been around the front.
Re: People on this forum have overblown POP
« Reply #19 on: July 18, 2017, 01:14:09 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
... all I've ever heard is disgusting negativity towards any new material.

... they want more expiementation like U2 did with Pop, but not like they did with No Line on the Horizon becuase they expierementaion on No Line "sucked".

... those same people who say U2 needs to be more expieremental always rank SOI better than No Line which is just hypocrital because No line was a risk with some safe songs like Crazy. There was nothing but safe songs on SOI.

I can't speak for anyone else, but from where I sit those of us who prefer experimental U2 don't insult everyone else on this forum with sweeping generalizations about what "they" always say or think, especially not when brand new to the group.

Your first impression is lacking.

Hope you realise Achtung Baby's songs are all basically three chord songs....

What relevance does that have? I have never mentioned whether I like or dislike three-chord songs. The question is too broad, like asking whether I like tall people. Swing and a miss.

Offline The Exile

  • Up With the Sun
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,076
  • Been around the back, Been around the front.
Re: People on this forum have overblown POP
« Reply #20 on: July 18, 2017, 01:16:52 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I'm just tired of all the negative comments so I thought I'd give my opposing opinion.

If you don't want to hear opinions different from yours because it tires you out, then maybe stay away from public forums? This place is not intended to be an echo chamber.

Online an tha

  • Airborne Ranger
  • ***
  • Posts: 9,383
  • You can swallow, or you can spit.
Re: People on this forum have overblown POP
« Reply #21 on: July 18, 2017, 01:20:45 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
visitors can't see pics , please You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login or You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


A coke with that?

yes thank you. this is why you're tops.

Oh by way speaking of tops that radiohead stuff.....fantastic!

Offline WookieeWarrior10

  • Elevated
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,739
  • Every Artist is a Cannibal, Every Poet is a Thief.
Re: People on this forum have overblown POP
« Reply #22 on: July 18, 2017, 02:10:53 PM »
If you really think that Pop was pandering for hits then you are missing the entire concept of the album. Them attempting to "fit into modern music trends" was done completely ironically.

Offline the_chief

  • Refugee
  • *
  • Posts: 253
Re: People on this forum have overblown POP
« Reply #23 on: July 18, 2017, 02:41:55 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
... all I've ever heard is disgusting negativity towards any new material.

... they want more expiementation like U2 did with Pop, but not like they did with No Line on the Horizon becuase they expierementaion on No Line "sucked".

... those same people who say U2 needs to be more expieremental always rank SOI better than No Line which is just hypocrital because No line was a risk with some safe songs like Crazy. There was nothing but safe songs on SOI.

I can't speak for anyone else, but from where I sit those of us who prefer experimental U2 don't insult everyone else on this forum with sweeping generalizations about what "they" always say or think, especially not when brand new to the group.

Your first impression is lacking.

Hope you realise Achtung Baby's songs are all basically three chord songs....

What relevance does that have? I have never mentioned whether I like or dislike three-chord songs. The question is too broad, like asking whether I like tall people. Swing and a miss.

You said you wanted experimental and adventurous U2.
Status Quo's, AC/DC's, Rory Gallagher's material are mostly 3 or 4 chord songs.

Just saying because they added an effect to the drums on Zoo Station doesn't make it any way more or less artistically great or "adventurous" as those artists I mentioned. Still a great song though mind, especially live
« Last Edit: July 18, 2017, 02:46:36 PM by the_chief »

Offline the_chief

  • Refugee
  • *
  • Posts: 253
Re: People on this forum have overblown POP
« Reply #24 on: July 18, 2017, 02:45:43 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


What the hell do you want them to do? Make good music you like or make absolutely sh**e music, that has a passage in one song that you deem to be "artistic" and "adventurous"

Why do the two things have to be mutually exclusive?



They don't but, I've been reading this forum for years and as far as I can see, there is a lot of snobbery in relation to their music.

Take their last album for example.
Raised By Wolves, California are two great songs. Nothing complicated, nothing "adventurous" yet, they're two top class songs.
EBW is another top class song, evident by the performances either with solo piano or string sections. Again, nothing too adventurous in terms of the structure, melody or arrangement.

Yet, all I've read is major criticism of those songs and that album on here. And the common theme is, it's not artistic, adventurous and experimental enough.

It's mind blowing. I get the impression some on here go out and buy a record and instead of basically either enjoying it or not, some of you sit there, scratching your chin and think, "Hmmm yes, that little grace note on bar 56 reminds me of an incident but, the rest is mediocre. Not good enough for me"

Case in point, The Little Things...As soon as I heard that song, it hit me! It's a beautifully crafted song, with hard hitting lyrics that hit home with me and certain issues I've had for some time. However, I'm also a musician and I didn't sit down and analyse it bar by bar. I didn't look down on it because it didn't introduce an experimental rap with a phase effect on the vocal. I either liked it or I didn't!

Unless you're the creator, that's what music should be about as a listener!
Imagine going for a pint and having a conversation about U2....

"So I see U2 released an album there last week"
"Yeah, I bought it..."
"What ya think? Any good?"
"Well, there are "good" songs on it but, from an artistic point of view, I think it needs to be more experimental in a wider sense and tackle the musical restraints of the 21st century"
".......................................Might wanna lay off the booze mate"

Coming from a guy who's already taken issue with what seems like overly-negative fans today, this seems equally egregious to me.  "California's a good song"....well ok.  I guess there's no more need to discuss it then?  You just determine what's "good", and we all go along with it?  I'm glad those songs worked for you, I truly am.  But there's no reason why they therefore have to work for anyone else. 


Clearly I've touched a nerve or you're going through your teenage years....Either way, your post did make me smirk.

I never said anything of the kind that you're accusing me off.
I said it's a good song, which it is. It's not sh**, it's got a good structure and hook, a good melody and a good chorus, therefore, it's a good song. I just stated that people on here pulled it apart because it wasn't some sort of challenging, artistic adventure. Which is actually a fact.

Fine, if you don't like it or not into it, more power to you. But, it's like I tell people who tell me they hate U2...You can hate them all you want but, they're not a sh** band...Like California, it's not a sh** song, it's just you don't like it or it doesn't tickle your pickle.

Believe me, we've all heard enough sh** songs to know the difference ....
« Last Edit: July 18, 2017, 02:47:53 PM by the_chief »

Offline the_chief

  • Refugee
  • *
  • Posts: 253
Re: People on this forum have overblown POP
« Reply #25 on: July 18, 2017, 02:55:33 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


What the hell do you want them to do? Make good music you like or make absolutely sh**e music, that has a passage in one song that you deem to be "artistic" and "adventurous"

Why do the two things have to be mutually exclusive?



They don't but, I've been reading this forum for years and as far as I can see, there is a lot of snobbery in relation to their music.

Take their last album for example.
Raised By Wolves, California are two great songs. Nothing complicated, nothing "adventurous" yet, they're two top class songs.
EBW is another top class song, evident by the performances either with solo piano or string sections. Again, nothing too adventurous in terms of the structure, melody or arrangement.

Yet, all I've read is major criticism of those songs and that album on here. And the common theme is, it's not artistic, adventurous and experimental enough.

It's mind blowing. I get the impression some on here go out and buy a record and instead of basically either enjoying it or not, some of you sit there, scratching your chin and think, "Hmmm yes, that little grace note on bar 56 reminds me of an incident but, the rest is mediocre. Not good enough for me"

Case in point, The Little Things...As soon as I heard that song, it hit me! It's a beautifully crafted song, with hard hitting lyrics that hit home with me and certain issues I've had for some time. However, I'm also a musician and I didn't sit down and analyse it bar by bar. I didn't look down on it because it didn't introduce an experimental rap with a phase effect on the vocal. I either liked it or I didn't!

Unless you're the creator, that's what music should be about as a listener!
Imagine going for a pint and having a conversation about U2....

"So I see U2 released an album there last week"
"Yeah, I bought it..."
"What ya think? Any good?"
"Well, there are "good" songs on it but, from an artistic point of view, I think it needs to be more experimental in a wider sense and tackle the musical restraints of the 21st century"
".......................................Might wanna lay off the booze mate"

Cracking post and exactly the kind that aids reasoned and interesting discussion.

You are dead on in agreeing they don't have to be mutually exclusive...

Using the examples you name from SOI - RBW - to me I agree this is a good song, the main reason i like it personally is that it deals with challenging subject matter and is interesting lyrically....it does not push any sonic boundaries as such really (although it does in a subtle manner) but it does not need to do so for me to like it.....it is for me an interesting song, well put together and is certainly not fluffy 'pop rock' u2 to me.

California - now we disagree, this to me is exactly the kind of 'knock out in their sleep' MOR u2 i just can't stand - it's platitude packed lyrics full of cliches about love etc just bores me - it is to me (that is the key phrase TO ME) just so beige....I don't like it lyrically or sonically.

EBW - could be a belter but it (again) for me suffers from having this pop veneer applied to it that i find sickly sweet and which i find sucks the emotional impact/feel out of the song.

The whole thing isn't always about experimental meaning good or non experimental meaning bad and it is my view that people here including myself who are vocal about u2's more recent output are usually pretty fair and express their thoughts because they care and because they feel a u2 forum is a place where they can do so candidly....

I can only speak for myself but i will always try and back up my view with as reasoned an argument as my limited intelligence allows and will take on board others views too and try to discuss fairly, openly and respectfully.

It is my view that some of the self appointed 'positive' people don't always do the same but like to point out it is the what they deem 'negative' people who are guilty of not being balanced or reasoned.....most of the time the balance is there to be fair from both 'sides' (for want of a better phrase) of course i can also see how mega fans of a band can be very sensitive about any criticism of the band...

Ultimately it all boils down to individual taste and opinion - it isn't always open and shut and there are many shades to the discussion - the one big thing i always come back to is that i believe u2 have always been better when they are working shall we say in the less obvious places.

I believe strongly that u2 generally make great alternative rock/more ambient songs and largely not very good or bad straight up rock/pop rock songs.

That is just me and my view though....

Few things...

1. I don't believe SOI should have been as lush as it was, soundwise. It's supposed to be called SOI for a reason. Miracle was supposed to be about discovering music for the first time yet, it's filled with so many layers. Good song though.

2. Wouldn't say sensitive is the term I'd use...I'm more than happy and willing to call U2 out if they produce sh**. I still haven't forgiven them for their "attempts" at getting the sound right for certain gigs in stadiums or choices they put on albums ahead of better b-sides etc etc...The element of snobbery towards music is something I can't get on board with. Not just U2, anyone's....With the exception of one or two obviously.

3. I think U2 make very good straight up rock/pop songs.. I Will Follow, THBAO, OOC, Electric Co. A Day Without Me, NYD, IGC, Desire, The Fly, Vertigo(I know it's been played to death) All Because Of You...Nothing to complicated, just straight up, in your face rock...I mean, I Will Follow is probably the simplest song they've ever written yet, it's one of the best! It's a song none of us will ever get sick off imo

Offline WookieeWarrior10

  • Elevated
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,739
  • Every Artist is a Cannibal, Every Poet is a Thief.
Re: People on this forum have overblown POP
« Reply #26 on: July 18, 2017, 03:53:01 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
... all I've ever heard is disgusting negativity towards any new material.

... they want more expiementation like U2 did with Pop, but not like they did with No Line on the Horizon becuase they expierementaion on No Line "sucked".

... those same people who say U2 needs to be more expieremental always rank SOI better than No Line which is just hypocrital because No line was a risk with some safe songs like Crazy. There was nothing but safe songs on SOI.

I can't speak for anyone else, but from where I sit those of us who prefer experimental U2 don't insult everyone else on this forum with sweeping generalizations about what "they" always say or think, especially not when brand new to the group.

Your first impression is lacking.

Hope you realise Achtung Baby's songs are all basically three chord songs....

What relevance does that have? I have never mentioned whether I like or dislike three-chord songs. The question is too broad, like asking whether I like tall people. Swing and a miss.

You said you wanted experimental and adventurous U2.
Status Quo's, AC/DC's, Rory Gallagher's material are mostly 3 or 4 chord songs.

Just saying because they added an effect to the drums on Zoo Station doesn't make it any way more or less artistically great or "adventurous" as those artists I mentioned. Still a great song though mind, especially live

Isn't trying new things what makes music more adventurous? Zoo Station is vastly different than anything U2 had created before it.

Bono's vocals on this song are much more effect-heavy compared to his performances in the '80s, which featured more subtle and natural-sounding changes. The bit-crush effect on Larry's drumming you mentioned was also very musically adventurous for U2.

All of the impressive production aside, the actual playing of the band was also relatively experimental. Edge's sweeping "riff" to start the track, Adam's funk-driven bassline, Bono's low register singing... how is Zoo Station not an adventurous song?

Offline The Exile

  • Up With the Sun
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,076
  • Been around the back, Been around the front.
Re: People on this forum have overblown POP
« Reply #27 on: July 18, 2017, 03:59:42 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
... all I've ever heard is disgusting negativity towards any new material.

... they want more expiementation like U2 did with Pop, but not like they did with No Line on the Horizon becuase they expierementaion on No Line "sucked".

... those same people who say U2 needs to be more expieremental always rank SOI better than No Line which is just hypocrital because No line was a risk with some safe songs like Crazy. There was nothing but safe songs on SOI.

I can't speak for anyone else, but from where I sit those of us who prefer experimental U2 don't insult everyone else on this forum with sweeping generalizations about what "they" always say or think, especially not when brand new to the group.

Your first impression is lacking.

Hope you realise Achtung Baby's songs are all basically three chord songs....

What relevance does that have? I have never mentioned whether I like or dislike three-chord songs. The question is too broad, like asking whether I like tall people. Swing and a miss.

You said you wanted experimental and adventurous U2.
Status Quo's, AC/DC's, Rory Gallagher's material are mostly 3 or 4 chord songs.

Just saying because they added an effect to the drums on Zoo Station doesn't make it any way more or less artistically great or "adventurous" as those artists I mentioned. Still a great song though mind, especially live

Isn't trying new things what makes music more adventurous? Zoo Station is vastly different than anything U2 had created before it.

Bono's vocals on this song are much more effect-heavy compared to his performances in the '80s, which featured more subtle and natural-sounding changes. The bit-crush effect on Larry's drumming you mentioned was also very musically adventurous for U2.

All of the impressive production aside, the actual playing of the band was also relatively experimental. Edge's sweeping "riff" to start the track, Adam's funk-driven bassline, Bono's low register singing... how is Zoo Station not an adventurous song?

But it has 3 chords, so it's the same as Pride.

Offline the_chief

  • Refugee
  • *
  • Posts: 253
Re: People on this forum have overblown POP
« Reply #28 on: July 18, 2017, 04:01:56 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
... all I've ever heard is disgusting negativity towards any new material.

... they want more expiementation like U2 did with Pop, but not like they did with No Line on the Horizon becuase they expierementaion on No Line "sucked".

... those same people who say U2 needs to be more expieremental always rank SOI better than No Line which is just hypocrital because No line was a risk with some safe songs like Crazy. There was nothing but safe songs on SOI.

I can't speak for anyone else, but from where I sit those of us who prefer experimental U2 don't insult everyone else on this forum with sweeping generalizations about what "they" always say or think, especially not when brand new to the group.

Your first impression is lacking.

Hope you realise Achtung Baby's songs are all basically three chord songs....

What relevance does that have? I have never mentioned whether I like or dislike three-chord songs. The question is too broad, like asking whether I like tall people. Swing and a miss.

You said you wanted experimental and adventurous U2.
Status Quo's, AC/DC's, Rory Gallagher's material are mostly 3 or 4 chord songs.

Just saying because they added an effect to the drums on Zoo Station doesn't make it any way more or less artistically great or "adventurous" as those artists I mentioned. Still a great song though mind, especially live

Isn't trying new things what makes music more adventurous? Zoo Station is vastly different than anything U2 had created before it.

Bono's vocals on this song are much more effect-heavy compared to his performances in the '80s, which featured more subtle and natural-sounding changes. The bit-crush effect on Larry's drumming you mentioned was also very musically adventurous for U2.

All of the impressive production aside, the actual playing of the band was also relatively experimental. Edge's sweeping "riff" to start the track, Adam's funk-driven bassline, Bono's low register singing... how is Zoo Station not an adventurous song?

But it has 3 chords, so it's the same as Pride.

See, I never said that. Never even thought of it.

Offline the_chief

  • Refugee
  • *
  • Posts: 253
Re: People on this forum have overblown POP
« Reply #29 on: July 18, 2017, 04:07:19 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
... all I've ever heard is disgusting negativity towards any new material.

... they want more expiementation like U2 did with Pop, but not like they did with No Line on the Horizon becuase they expierementaion on No Line "sucked".

... those same people who say U2 needs to be more expieremental always rank SOI better than No Line which is just hypocrital because No line was a risk with some safe songs like Crazy. There was nothing but safe songs on SOI.

I can't speak for anyone else, but from where I sit those of us who prefer experimental U2 don't insult everyone else on this forum with sweeping generalizations about what "they" always say or think, especially not when brand new to the group.

Your first impression is lacking.

Hope you realise Achtung Baby's songs are all basically three chord songs....

What relevance does that have? I have never mentioned whether I like or dislike three-chord songs. The question is too broad, like asking whether I like tall people. Swing and a miss.

You said you wanted experimental and adventurous U2.
Status Quo's, AC/DC's, Rory Gallagher's material are mostly 3 or 4 chord songs.

Just saying because they added an effect to the drums on Zoo Station doesn't make it any way more or less artistically great or "adventurous" as those artists I mentioned. Still a great song though mind, especially live

Isn't trying new things what makes music more adventurous? Zoo Station is vastly different than anything U2 had created before it.

Bono's vocals on this song are much more effect-heavy compared to his performances in the '80s, which featured more subtle and natural-sounding changes. The bit-crush effect on Larry's drumming you mentioned was also very musically adventurous for U2.

All of the impressive production aside, the actual playing of the band was also relatively experimental. Edge's sweeping "riff" to start the track, Adam's funk-driven bassline, Bono's low register singing... how is Zoo Station not an adventurous song?

Bono's vocal yes. I agree.
But the riff is nothing new and Adam was always coming up with great bass lines so that's nothing new either.

I'm not knocking it, Achtung Baby is my favourite album by anyone.
My point is, I mentioned three artists above. Their stuff is mostly 3 or 4 chords, just like Achtung Baby was. My question was, is their music less "artistic" and was their music any less "adventurous" musically?
Forget the sound effects for a moment, I'm talking strictly musically.

Maybe for the time that was in it and where U2 came from previously it was a step into the unknown with all the new sounds and stuff
« Last Edit: July 18, 2017, 04:09:31 PM by the_chief »