Author Topic: If POP Was Considered A Huge Success - Would U2 Be A Different Band Now? And...  (Read 5104 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Mr. BonorFLYd

  • Child of Grace
  • **
  • Posts: 1,944
  • Music you can eat!
IF SO, HOW WOULD U2 & THEIR MUSIC BE DIFFERENT TODAY?



Offline JuniorEmblem

  • Child of Grace
  • **
  • Posts: 1,795
  • 10 types, those who know binary & those who don't
Pop WAS a huge success, both commercially and artistically



 

andyt

  • Guest
JuniorEmblem, POP wasn't a huge success commercially - at least not by U2's standards.

It was artistically but it also lost U2 a lot of fans - which is why they released the radio friendly pap that was most of ATYCLB...

Offline Yukona [The League of Extraordinary Bonopeople]

  • Staring at the Sun
  • **
  • Posts: 1,426
  • too much is not enough
They probably would have gone back to basics anyway. Larry was already voicing his dissatisfaction with the direction the band had taken way back since Passengers: ATYCLB was a long time coming.

Offline jick

  • Precious Stone
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,754
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
They probably would have gone back to basics anyway. Larry was already voicing his dissatisfaction with the direction the band had taken way back since Passengers: ATYCLB was a long time coming.

Well said. I totally agree here.

Cheers,

J

Offline torontohorizon

  • Stateless
  • *
  • Posts: 116
Poor SeniorEmblem,

always getting his opinions SHOT down!

Offline JuniorEmblem

  • Child of Grace
  • **
  • Posts: 1,795
  • 10 types, those who know binary & those who don't
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Poor SeniorEmblem,

always getting his opinions SHOT down!

Opinions CAN'T be shot down, they are my opinions and are right, for me.

Pop WAS a huge success, unless you don't think selling approx 8 Million albums and playing to millions a "failure"

 ::) ::) ::)

Offline the Edge Gotto

  • Elevated
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,833
  • U2, Peter Gabriel, and Genesis shall dominate
I think Larry would have put an end to that one.

An Cat Dubh

  • Guest
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
They probably would have gone back to basics anyway. Larry was already voicing his dissatisfaction with the direction the band had taken way back since Passengers: ATYCLB was a long time coming.

Well said. I totally agree here.

Cheers,

J


So going back to basics (ATYCLB) was a long time coming eh? That means that you hate AB & Zooropa as well. Quite a bit of U2 you dont like there folks.

Offline Yukona [The League of Extraordinary Bonopeople]

  • Staring at the Sun
  • **
  • Posts: 1,426
  • too much is not enough
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
They probably would have gone back to basics anyway. Larry was already voicing his dissatisfaction with the direction the band had taken way back since Passengers: ATYCLB was a long time coming.

Well said. I totally agree here.

Cheers,

J


So going back to basics (ATYCLB) was a long time coming eh? That means that you hate AB & Zooropa as well. Quite a bit of U2 you dont like there folks.

On the contrary, Achtung Baby tops my list for best album ever, and Zooropa contains two of my favorite songs of all time: Stay and Wanderer. What I meant was that after the experimentation of the 90s, U2 wanted to get back to the feeling of playing as a band in a room, with guitars bouncing off the walls and drums pounding through your gut. Nothing wrong or right about that; it's just the way the band flowed. So in this context, long time coming refers to a matter of interpersonal inevitability and not a musical judgement.

An Cat Dubh

  • Guest
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
They probably would have gone back to basics anyway. Larry was already voicing his dissatisfaction with the direction the band had taken way back since Passengers: ATYCLB was a long time coming.

Well said. I totally agree here.

Cheers,

J


So going back to basics (ATYCLB) was a long time coming eh? That means that you hate AB & Zooropa as well. Quite a bit of U2 you dont like there folks.

On the contrary, Achtung Baby tops my list for best album ever, and Zooropa contains two of my favorite songs of all time: Stay and Wanderer. What I meant was that after the experimentation of the 90s, U2 wanted to get back to the feeling of playing as a band in a room, with guitars bouncing off the walls and drums pounding through your gut. Nothing wrong or right about that; it's just the way the band flowed. So in this context, long time coming refers to a matter of interpersonal inevitability and not a musical judgement.

yukona, it wasn't you my post was aimed at, sorry. I agree with you. Although All That You Cant Leave Behind and How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb are not my favorite albums, I do like them, they contain some fantastic songs. Yes, the 90's were extremely experimental for U2, but it was an experiment they HAD to do, and it was U2's most daring period in their history with regards to developing themselves as musicians.
So, I totally understand why they wanted to get back to the '4 musicians making great music with just their instruments' for the early part of this decade. I do think though, even though they state this as the main reason for the 'safe' ATYCLB & HTDAAB, that there were other reasons - maily the fact that they panicked a little after Pop as they felt they were 'not relevant' any more and their popularity had diminished somewhat. They also felt they needed to 'widen' their fan base and attract some more younger fans.
All good things though in the incredible longeivity of U2, and I opologize for questioning your judgement, as you say, not right or wrong - absoultely, opinions and taste are what this is all about.
Thankfully, from what I've heard so far, U2 have taken everything they have learned over their whole history into account for No Line On The Horizon. Experimentation, risks, back to basics, 4 guys playing music, production, influences, new sounds and recording techniques etc, etc. I think we are all in for a treat.

jimyjazz

  • Guest
I think they would have continued to experiment, but maybe not used as much programming and let Larry drum more.

Offline onetreehill

  • Up With the Sun
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,684
  • to the rhythm of my soul
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
JuniorEmblem, POP wasn't a huge success commercially - at least not by U2's standards.

It was artistically but it also lost U2 a lot of fans - which is why they released the radio friendly pap that was most of ATYCLB...

In my opinion I don't know technically if U2 lost fans?  I mean we are all still here, maybe just didn't pick up any new ones?

Also I had trouble getting tickets for Elevation tour?  Who were buying all the tickets if fans were lost?

Offline Mr. BonorFLYd

  • Child of Grace
  • **
  • Posts: 1,944
  • Music you can eat!
I think they would mix hip-hop with Klezmer music by now!

Offline cathalmc

  • Party Girl/Boy
  • **
  • Posts: 660

Well yes, but they'd be a different band if any album's reception was very different to what it was, positive or negative.

If Passengers had been an interstellar, runaway success then they'd probably be the house band in Aphex Twin's ar*e by now.