Author Topic: POP: The High Watermark Of U2's Frustration and Their Most Turbulent Period  (Read 14101 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline jick

  • Precious Stone
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,754
Re: POP: The High Watermark Of U2's Frustration and Their Most Turbulent Period
« Reply #75 on: February 11, 2009, 10:59:06 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

P.S. Please tell us a joke Jick...I know that you have it in you.


My joke was in another thread when I said the Rolling Stones covered U2's "Fortunate Son" but I'm not sure if the people following that thread got the joke.

Cheers,

J

Offline jick

  • Precious Stone
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,754
Re: POP: The High Watermark Of U2's Frustration and Their Most Turbulent Period
« Reply #76 on: February 11, 2009, 11:04:42 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Who cares what the band says? They will usually be their own harshest critics. The point is, most true fans love Pop. Just accept it. ATYCLB and HTDAAB were decent albums, but not as deep, dark, or as innovative as Pop. It seems like it was just a bad experience for the band, rushed schedules, things they didn't get to do that they wanted to. I'm a musician myself, and I've found that sometimes songs that I've done that I hate are sometimes the ones everyone else loves, sometimes better than the ones I think are awesome. So you don't need to "educate" the new fans, and that's not what you're doing. If a fan listens to Pop and says "wow, this is good!" then so be it. Knowing that the band wasn't 100% happy with it won't change their opinion. And if they wanted to research it, I hear that teens and people in their early 20's are pretty good with the internet and looking things up. Like, if they wanted to know what Fez was...

You don't like Pop. We get it. Do we need tons and tons of threads and posts by you continually beating the dead horse?

While you ask "who cares what the band says"?  I really don't know who among those here care.  But I do care and that is the reason I read band interviews and bought U2 By U2.  I don't follow U2 just because of their music and don't form my opinions just on what's in the album and then decide.  I also am a big fan of Bono's charity work, and am a fan beyond the four corners of the music.

I am not sure if the stuff I posted here  - U2 By U2 and Q Magazine issues circa 97, 00 , and 02 - are accessible online.  Perhaps you can show me a link? 

That is why I did this service for the U2 newbies here - or at least to those who want to see what goes on in U2's mind.  To those who don't care about tangential aspects of the band, then disregard this topic.

Cheers,

J

Offline CiscoJP

  • Stateless
  • *
  • Posts: 123
Re: POP: The High Watermark Of U2's Frustration and Their Most Turbulent Period
« Reply #77 on: February 11, 2009, 11:14:25 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Who cares what the band says? They will usually be their own harshest critics. The point is, most true fans love Pop. Just accept it. ATYCLB and HTDAAB were decent albums, but not as deep, dark, or as innovative as Pop. It seems like it was just a bad experience for the band, rushed schedules, things they didn't get to do that they wanted to. I'm a musician myself, and I've found that sometimes songs that I've done that I hate are sometimes the ones everyone else loves, sometimes better than the ones I think are awesome. So you don't need to "educate" the new fans, and that's not what you're doing. If a fan listens to Pop and says "wow, this is good!" then so be it. Knowing that the band wasn't 100% happy with it won't change their opinion. And if they wanted to research it, I hear that teens and people in their early 20's are pretty good with the internet and looking things up. Like, if they wanted to know what Fez was...

You don't like Pop. We get it. Do we need tons and tons of threads and posts by you continually beating the dead horse?

While you ask "who cares what the band says"?  I really don't know who among those here care.  But I do care and that is the reason I read band interviews and bought U2 By U2.  I don't follow U2 just because of their music and don't form my opinions just on what's in the album and then decide.  I also am a big fan of Bono's charity work, and am a fan beyond the four corners of the music.

I am not sure if the stuff I posted here  - U2 By U2 and Q Magazine issues circa 97, 00 , and 02 - are accessible online.  Perhaps you can show me a link? 

That is why I did this service for the U2 newbies here - or at least to those who want to see what goes on in U2's mind.  To those who don't care about tangential aspects of the band, then disregard this topic.

Cheers,

J


You're misunderstanding. We all care about the band, and what they think, beyond the music. But who cares if the band didn't like Pop if you are one of those fans who likes the album? Ask any artist, and I'm sure there's a song or an album or a performance in their career that they are not happy with. Does that mean the fans should also stop enjoying it? You're here pushing your own agenda, and using the band's words to do so. It has nothing to do with "education." You need links? How about Wikipedia? The entry on Pop mentions how the band was dissatisfied with the abum, and how they re
mixed or re-recorded certain songs for the Best Of... album. Do we need enless quotes from you rehashing this, day in and day out?

You've apparently been banned from Wire and Interference. You're annoying most fans in these forums, and even the moderators, who are quite fair here, are growing tired of you. Maybe it's time to move on to something else?

Offline Mr. BonorFLYd

  • Child of Grace
  • **
  • Posts: 1,944
  • Music you can eat!
Re: POP: The High Watermark Of U2's Frustration and Their Most Turbulent Period
« Reply #78 on: February 11, 2009, 11:30:43 AM »
I was listening to POP this morning. I think it is still very very good. I think it was a bit ahead of it's time! I think a lot of people weren't ready for those sounds & a lot of people weren't ready for U2 to make that sort of music, especially in the U.S. Much of what U2 were delving into were more European Dance Music forms. Trip-Hop, Techno, Jungle etc. I remember not many people listening to those genres, except the kids perhaps.

I think if POP were released now, it would get a much more positive reaction. It is a bit "Electro but Hand-played" as Daniel Lanois like to say now. And I think "Get On Your Boots" could almost fit on POP. Matter of fact at the Grammy's Edge's guitar sound was that of Discoteque until the distortion kicked in. *The band should not apologize for this album. It just didn't fully connect at the time it was released, that's all. Certainly it was a very ambitious sound!

Offline Zoonationalist

  • Refugee
  • *
  • Posts: 217
  • www.themarinerwritings.wordpress.com
Re: POP: The High Watermark Of U2's Frustration and Their Most Turbulent Period
« Reply #79 on: February 11, 2009, 11:32:40 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I was listening to POP this morning. I think it is still very very good. I think it was a bit ahead of it's time! I think a lot of people weren't ready for those sounds & a lot of people weren't ready for U2 to make that sort of music, especially in the U.S. Much of what U2 were delving into were more European Dance Music forms. Trip-Hop, Techno, Jungle etc. I remember not many people listening to those genres, except the kids perhaps.

I think if POP were released now, it would get a much more positive reaction. It is a bit "Electro but Hand-played" as Daniel Lanois like to say now. And I think "Get On Your Boots" could almost fit on POP. Matter of fact at the Grammy's Edge's guitar sound was that of Discoteque until the distortion kicked in. *The band should not apologize for this album. It just didn't fully connect at the time it was released, that's all. Certainly it was a very ambitious sound!

Everything except for the lyrics. Bono was still writing gems on Pop!

Offline Mr. BonorFLYd

  • Child of Grace
  • **
  • Posts: 1,944
  • Music you can eat!
Re: POP: The High Watermark Of U2's Frustration and Their Most Turbulent Period
« Reply #80 on: February 11, 2009, 12:49:09 PM »
Maybe that's because with Bono...we actually understand and listen to the lyrics. There are hardly any other Singers I can think of that I pay enough attention to the lyrics right now. Sometimes that's because I can't understand their sloppy speech, or they muffle their words out of embarrassment, or the mix emphasizes the instrumentation and not the voice, or the singer is just plain BORING. or ALL OF THE ABOVE.

Both fans and H8ters listen and critique every word Bono says. I think sometimes he says some questionable things just to pri*k your ears up & make sure you're listening. But, I'd argue that he is the most 'listened to' singer in terms of how many people tune in to what he's going off about.  ;)
« Last Edit: February 11, 2009, 12:51:15 PM by Mr. Bonorfied »

joegtheog

  • Guest
Re: POP: The High Watermark Of U2's Frustration and Their Most Turbulent Period
« Reply #81 on: February 11, 2009, 01:40:58 PM »
I still think when all is said and done POP will be regarded as a true classic.

Offline Lesmo

  • Party Girl/Boy
  • **
  • Posts: 562
Re: POP: The High Watermark Of U2's Frustration and Their Most Turbulent Period
« Reply #82 on: February 11, 2009, 01:49:48 PM »
I just got me POMART TOUR BOOK!!!!!!!!!!!  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Offline JuniorEmblem

  • Child of Grace
  • **
  • Posts: 1,795
  • 10 types, those who know binary & those who don't
Re: POP: The High Watermark Of U2's Frustration and Their Most Turbulent Period
« Reply #83 on: February 11, 2009, 01:50:38 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I just got me POMART TOUR BOOK!!!!!!!!!!!  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

There's only about 3 zillion people went to popmart, how can those be in short supply ??


Offline Lesmo

  • Party Girl/Boy
  • **
  • Posts: 562
Re: POP: The High Watermark Of U2's Frustration and Their Most Turbulent Period
« Reply #84 on: February 11, 2009, 01:53:33 PM »
I dunnno but it was the first one in... Six years since I began going to look for things on Ebay that it was in an acceptable state and an acceptable price... like 40-45$...

Offline Terrasidius

  • Party Girl/Boy
  • **
  • Posts: 568
  • Bass suit, bug shades, moon boogie motorcade
Re: POP: The High Watermark Of U2's Frustration and Their Most Turbulent Period
« Reply #85 on: February 11, 2009, 01:59:46 PM »
jick, I am 25; when I bought Pop it was my first U2 album, it introduced me to the band. I adore it for all the reasons most people who like it state. My generation like dirty, underground, progressive, dub, techno, trip-hop and all that. When I heard Discotheque (the album version) for the first time I knew I had found my fave band. I rest my rather simple case. :D

Offline Lesmo

  • Party Girl/Boy
  • **
  • Posts: 562
Re: POP: The High Watermark Of U2's Frustration and Their Most Turbulent Period
« Reply #86 on: February 11, 2009, 02:01:38 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
jick, I am 25; when I bought Pop it was my first U2 album, it introduced me to the band. I adore it for all the reasons most people who like it state. My generation like dirty, underground, progressive, dub, techno, trip-hop and all that. When I heard Discotheque (the album version) for the first time I knew I had found my fave band. I rest my rather simple case. :D

*APPLAUSE*

Offline Zoonationalist

  • Refugee
  • *
  • Posts: 217
  • www.themarinerwritings.wordpress.com
Re: POP: The High Watermark Of U2's Frustration and Their Most Turbulent Period
« Reply #87 on: February 11, 2009, 03:37:33 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
jick, I am 25; when I bought Pop it was my first U2 album, it introduced me to the band. I adore it for all the reasons most people who like it state. My generation like dirty, underground, progressive, dub, techno, trip-hop and all that. When I heard Discotheque (the album version) for the first time I knew I had found my fave band. I rest my rather simple case. :D

*APPLAUSE*

+1.
I'm 23...Pop was AWESOME. Maybe the staple of U2's "street cred."

Offline Terrasidius

  • Party Girl/Boy
  • **
  • Posts: 568
  • Bass suit, bug shades, moon boogie motorcade
Re: POP: The High Watermark Of U2's Frustration and Their Most Turbulent Period
« Reply #88 on: February 11, 2009, 03:39:41 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
jick, I am 25; when I bought Pop it was my first U2 album, it introduced me to the band. I adore it for all the reasons most people who like it state. My generation like dirty, underground, progressive, dub, techno, trip-hop and all that. When I heard Discotheque (the album version) for the first time I knew I had found my fave band. I rest my rather simple case. :D

*APPLAUSE*

+1.
I'm 23...Pop was AWESOME. Maybe the staple of U2's "street cred."

I think that U2 definately earned their "cool points" in the 90s (including the awesome Passengers album and single!) and connected with an entirely new audience...regardless of how unhappy J is about it.

Offline Bono in Bonolands

  • Numb
  • **
  • Posts: 881
Re: POP: The High Watermark Of U2's Frustration and Their Most Turbulent Period
« Reply #89 on: February 11, 2009, 03:41:06 PM »
NLOTH will be a lot like POP.