Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: U2 on Metacritic  (Read 1145 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Manos73

  • Numb
  • **
  • Posts: 897
  • Stop trying to change the world, I like it.
U2 on Metacritic
« on: January 07, 2018, 01:27:39 PM »
Metacritic is a review aggregator that builds an average score for a record on a basis of 0 - 100. They've rated the last 7 U2 releases (including re-releases).  Here are their respective scores:

1987/2017 - The Joshua Tree [30th Anniversary Super Deluxe Edition] - 90
1991/2011 - Achtung Baby [Super Deluxe] - 93
2000- All That You Can't Leave Behind - 79
2005 - How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb - 79
2009 - No Line On The Horizon - 72
2014 - Songs of Innocence - 64
2017 - Songs of Experience - 63

There is an unmistakable downward linear trend.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Logged


Offline Argo

  • Party Girl/Boy
  • **
  • Posts: 685
  • Don't let the bastards grind you down
Re: U2 on Metacritic
« Reply #1 on: January 07, 2018, 06:27:02 PM »
As my mother would say - if megacritic jumped off a cliff, would you? It is irrelevant. You like what you like and I definitely don't like ATYCLB more than SOI and SOE.
Logged

Offline davis

  • Stateless
  • *
  • Posts: 103
Re: U2 on Metacritic
« Reply #2 on: January 08, 2018, 01:15:52 PM »
Yeah, the review aggregate thing says a lot more about how "cool" something is at a given cultural moment.  U2 has not been officially cool for decades. 

The fact that SOE is basically identical to SOI in ranking is enough to discredit it for me, as SOE is a far stronger album (yes, in my opinion). 
Logged

Offline Manos73

  • Numb
  • **
  • Posts: 897
  • Stop trying to change the world, I like it.
Re: U2 on Metacritic
« Reply #3 on: January 08, 2018, 04:07:01 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Yeah, the review aggregate thing says a lot more about how "cool" something is at a given cultural moment.  U2 has not been officially cool for decades. 

The fact that SOE is basically identical to SOI in ranking is enough to discredit it for me, as SOE is a far stronger album (yes, in my opinion). 
SOI has more lasting power. I still listen to SOI on occasion. Never SOE.
Logged

Offline Allhorizonbomb

  • Wanderer
  • *
  • Posts: 95
  • Self proclaimed biggest U2 fan in New York State
Re: U2 on Metacritic
« Reply #4 on: January 08, 2018, 04:47:56 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Yeah, the review aggregate thing says a lot more about how "cool" something is at a given cultural moment.  U2 has not been officially cool for decades. 

The fact that SOE is basically identical to SOI in ranking is enough to discredit it for me, as SOE is a far stronger album (yes, in my opinion). 
SOI has more lasting power. I still listen to SOI on occasion. Never SOE.

It’s only been a month since it’s release. I think you may just be tired of it, and hopefully it gets better with time
Logged

Offline Luzita

  • Headache in a Suitcase
  • *
  • Posts: 384
Re: U2 on Metacritic
« Reply #5 on: January 08, 2018, 07:12:51 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Yeah, the review aggregate thing says a lot more about how "cool" something is at a given cultural moment.  U2 has not been officially cool for decades. 

Totally agree.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Logged

Offline mcpaulson22

  • Babyface
  • *
  • Posts: 46
  • Ill see you again when the stars fall from the sky
Re: U2 on Metacritic
« Reply #6 on: January 08, 2018, 11:38:40 PM »
Funny. I think SOE is their best album of the 2000s.
Metacritic gathers reviews from a lot of hipster websites that don't give much clout to old rock bands like U2.
It's a cultural shift of opinion more than anything.
Logged

Offline BalconyTV

  • Numb
  • **
  • Posts: 835
Re: U2 on Metacritic
« Reply #7 on: January 09, 2018, 04:37:41 AM »
Meh. I think aggregators are pretty accurate.

No Zooropa and Pop here?
Logged

Offline Manos73

  • Numb
  • **
  • Posts: 897
  • Stop trying to change the world, I like it.
Re: U2 on Metacritic
« Reply #8 on: January 10, 2018, 02:46:29 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Meh. I think aggregators are pretty accurate.

No Zooropa and Pop here?
I doesn't seem to go back further then 2000. I feel like Metacritic's pretty accurate. SOE wouldn't have been 63 without some over zealous 5/5 ratings from Rolling Stone and the like.
Logged

Offline davis

  • Stateless
  • *
  • Posts: 103
Re: U2 on Metacritic
« Reply #9 on: January 10, 2018, 04:22:21 PM »
Quote
SOE wouldn't have been 63 without some over zealous 5/5 ratings from Rolling Stone and the like.

You're mistaken.  Rolling Stone gave it a 4.5.  No other publication gave it over a 4.  On the flip side, there were a large number of reviews giving it two or two and a half stars.  If anything, the aggregate is skewed low by these ridiculous disses. 
Logged

Offline Manos73

  • Numb
  • **
  • Posts: 897
  • Stop trying to change the world, I like it.
Re: U2 on Metacritic
« Reply #10 on: January 11, 2018, 12:46:47 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote
SOE wouldn't have been 63 without some over zealous 5/5 ratings from Rolling Stone and the like.

You're mistaken.  Rolling Stone gave it a 4.5.  No other publication gave it over a 4.  On the flip side, there were a large number of reviews giving it two or two and a half stars.  If anything, the aggregate is skewed low by these ridiculous disses. 
You're right about RS - 4.5. That's what I get for using my memory. They did get some 4/5's. This is from SOE's page on Wikipedia:

Source/Rating
AnyDecentMusic? 5.8/10
Metacritic - 63/100
AllMusic - 2.5/5 stars
Consequence of Sound - C–
The Daily Telegraph - 4/5 stars
The Guardian - 4/5 stars
The Independent - 2/5 stars
Mojo - 4/5 stars
NME - 2/5 stars
Pitchfork - 5.3/10
Q - 4/5 stars
Rolling Stone - 4.5/5 stars

A Venn diagram of Bono's connections would show the more he's involved with the people at a mag, the higher the album did in reviews. NME's review of SOE has to hurt even more - not that they've been U2 fans for a while.

So I stand by my comment. Without some old school rock mags and political Bono fellow travellers giving SOE above average reviews, Metacritic would be well below 63. U2 can't be happy about the reviews.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
« Last Edit: January 11, 2018, 12:51:58 PM by Manos73 »
Logged

Offline paddyattitude

  • Party Girl/Boy
  • **
  • Posts: 744
Re: U2 on Metacritic
« Reply #11 on: January 12, 2018, 11:21:34 AM »
they probably listens to albums just once...
Logged

Offline paddyattitude

  • Party Girl/Boy
  • **
  • Posts: 744
Re: U2 on Metacritic
« Reply #12 on: January 12, 2018, 01:59:46 PM »
critics are hypocrites
back in the days they never such a high mark to Achtung Baby when it came out
Logged

Offline Manos73

  • Numb
  • **
  • Posts: 897
  • Stop trying to change the world, I like it.
Re: U2 on Metacritic
« Reply #13 on: January 12, 2018, 05:21:22 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
critics are hypocrites
back in the days they never such a high mark to Achtung Baby when it came out
I just looked up the current top 10 albums on the Billboard Rock Charts. SOE is at #10 but is the third highest rated album of the 10 (using Metacritic ratings). 
« Last Edit: January 12, 2018, 05:22:56 PM by Manos73 »
Logged

Offline davis

  • Stateless
  • *
  • Posts: 103
Re: U2 on Metacritic
« Reply #14 on: January 13, 2018, 03:01:04 PM »
Ok, but just go on metacritic.  You can see all the ratings/publications they used for their rating.  There is an absurd number of 2s and 2.5s skewing the aggregate down. 
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up