jreed

U2 has one album left in them after Experience

Recommended Posts

Disclaimer: I believe U2 is greatest band in the world.  I haven't seen or heard a better band in my lifetime and I don't think I ever will.  Also, I'm a paying fan club member and own almost everything they've ever released.  If I don't have a physical copy of it, I'm sure I have it digitally.

I believe U2 will release one more album after Experience and call it day.  I'm thinking it's just a matter of time, I think they know they have nothing more to prove.  Quite frankly, I hope they do what R.E.M. did.  Put out one last amazing album and then call it a day.  Everybody shakes hands and goes home.  I also don't believe that the band can keep up the current touring pace at their age.  A U2 tour lasts anywhere from 2 to 3 years.  In my opinion, the I+E tour has never actually stopped.  I would go so far as to say that The Joshua Tree 2017 tour was part of it.  I would also argue that the stadium shows that were done were supposed to be I+E shows.  Do I want them to retire?  Selfishly, yes!  There is a quality U2 possesses that no other band possesses, that goes for The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, Zeppelin, Pearl Jam, Oasis, Nirvana, and anyone else you want to add.  That quality is nobility.  Their music is noble and when it's played or heard, it reaches out for the very best of everyone of us.  That just doesn't exist anymore.  I don't want this band to go the way of the Stones.  I love the Stones, but those guys look a little ridiculous these days.  I just don't want to see Bono and The Edge trying to run around the stage at the age of 70.  I'd be afraid it'd cheapen their music somehow, and knowing how the general public hates a sell out, it would look as though they have gone that route.  Finally, Bono keeps referring to this "brush with his own mortality" recently, which I don't know if you've been keeping score at home, that makes three times recently that Bono has almost met a fatal end.  If it was bad then, then that has to have some effect on his body, and I'm not a fan of the idea of Bono collapsing and dying on stage.  Some of you will wholeheartedly disagree with me and I welcome that.  I'd love to hear another perspective.  Thanks for taking a second to read this crazy ramble.  I hope you're all well in the U2niverse!

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great first post.;)

Would agree with some of that - but sure 50 is the new 40, and 70 is the new 50. It's not an age thing for me - it's quality of the music - but U2 have climbed that tree that very few do - any release is now an 'eagerly awaited release!'

It's a good place for them to be. And, y'know what? It's not a bad place for fans of their music to be too.

 

The thing for me about this band is - my life, original line up, health is with them n me thus far - that's not the norm - when's something going to give!:mellow:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also think about whether I hope they make one last big splash at some point and call it a day, or just keep rocking into the horizon...I agree I don't really want them to turn into something like the Stones, but I also don't want them to ever retire and not be making music and performing!  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was a huge REM fan and I think their case was slightly different. After Bill Berry left the spell was broken and they struggled to keep the magic alive. Their last four records never quite hit the heights of pre-1996 and the remaining members had other projects they wanted to pursue. I can't imagine Larry Mullen driving a tractor just yet! 

Frankly, I think U2 love performing together more and they are a much better band now than REM were at the end. The idea of U2 'doing an REM' fills me with dread, particularly since they are still making great music. You have to leave age out of it; all the decent rockers are getting on now. The Stones are magnificent now and more power to them ; Mick gives hope to us all! 

So, with the greatest of respect for your view jreed, I am in wholehearted disagreement with you! I will gladly trot along to see U2 in their 60s, 70s, 80s. Johnny Cash did it with style, Leonard Cohen did it, Bowie did it, BB King... All the greats. And U2 are great. 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the end is slowly coming to an end but they will continue to write new music and perform for the next 5-10 years. After that, they may call it a day. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I felt like there was a better chance 10 years ago, rather than now.  If they were hanging them up, they wouldn't' have tried to get this last album and tour out in back-back-back years.  They also have a 12 year contract with Live Nation, that ends in 2020, and they took some upfront money, so I doubt they would want to pay it back, nor do I see them not honoring that contract.  I also look at my favorite band, U2, and my favorite sporting team, the Yankees, and I break down whatever I can, because, 1 - I pay for it, and I want to see what I get out of it, 2 - it gives me an idea of how they operate, and what I can expect in the future.  I won't get into details, but I've been pretty close to knowing, predicting a good lot of what they do and think .  How tours are set up, length, when the team may retol to get under the salary cap, etc.  You get the picture, and know that I'm not trying to blow smoke up your ass, and I'm on the artistic side, I'm not saying I'm predicting what they are working on, if I did that, then I'd be Nostradamus or something to that effect.

So besides the contract with Live Nation, I think their record deal expires after this, or the next album.  As in the past, when U2's contract was expiring, they put on a major tour, major publicity and tried to sell the most albums out of their trilogy.  They usually do them in 3's.  Here we have a free album with each ticket.  Say they do 2 million tickets, that's 2 million albums to start off with.  If it's like an average album sale, they could do 3-4m, if the album has mass appeal, could we be at 15 million.  At this point, their label will want to ride this wave, and give them another contract.  My feeling is that there is actually another album that is almost done, and they could release it next fall to complete the trilogy, as Edge has said, they scrapped the album after Bono had a scare.  This complete the trilogy, and another tour, with a nice long break.  

The band also has touring down to a science, and probably are the most comfortable band on the planet, when it comes down to being restful during a tour, not saying it's not taxing, they just probably have it better than almost every band.    If you haven't flown business class, on a long trip, you don't know the difference, it's like night and day.  Imagine if you have your own plane, and after shows that are within a few hours of NYC, or Dublin, they fly back home that night, and are in their beds.  No more going from hotel to hotel, and this is the biggest reason why bands retire.  It's not easy, especially  after you hit 40. 

While the band is rich, they have taken some hits recently.  Edge put out a ton of money for his Malibu development, and was denied zoning, that's a lot of money, it was estimated at around $25m, I don't know if he sold the lots or kept them, but just planning for all this stuff is expensive, I know, I'm a real estate developer in NYC.  Bono took some hits on his investments, and while he made a killing, he took some big losses.  I would say he's ahead of the game, but it's human nature to want to make that money back, just saying.  These guys also have a ton of kids, have a ton of homes, yacht's other ventures like Eden, etc, that has to be funded.  And the U2 organization, is vast.  They have a staff in the U.S and Ireland, people have been with them for a long time, and as they probably have a pension for them, the staff has also let them know, they don't want to retire, and why would you, having U2 as bosses must be great, even if they expect the best out of you  The average age of the band is 55, the cream of the crop of musicians' don't retire (Bruce, Madonna, The Stones, The Eagle's (retire, come back, retire come back - could be a ticket ploy)  They work less, and pull in the same money.  I'd say that the band can do what they normally do for another 15 years, and then slow down once they hit 70.  The average album takes 2.5 years. but these guys take lot's of breaks in between, it's not like you have to show up 5 days a week, when you make an album.  When things are flowing, they work in overdrive, and when they get stuck, they probably take breaks, vacations etc.  After 2.5 years, they do a month of plugging the album.  Then, they hunker down in Ireland for 3 months, i.e. spend time with family, etc.  March is 3 weeks of prepping for the show, they do about 2 months in the states, a month off, 2 months E.U, a month off,   They either go to South America or Asia for 4 weeks, and are off for the year, or they come back to the states for 2 months, 2 -4 months off for winter, and they do another 3-4 months and the tour is over.  As you can see, there are good breaks in between, and when you make $700 million for touring for about 2 years, with a good amount of breaks, it's not as hard as it would be if you were in a bus and staying in cheap hotels.  So, unless there are health risks, they can continue this,or cut it back.  Also, we've never seen a rock band. that have been on top for long, 40 years, been best friends for the entire time, made so much money, made so many relevant albums, (with some hiccups, according to them and critics ( not most of us U2 fans), sold out so many tours, been a media darling with no fallouts or distractions, make sure that their causes work and are relevant, seem to really enjoy what they are doing, and don't just go through the motions of being in a rock band, and had the best manager in the business, and made a smooth transition to Guy Oseary, and have really cared about their fans, before social media made you have to show that you cared and did things for your fans.  Take yourself out of the your love for the band, imagine if you were one of the 4 gents in this band, the biggest, most successful bands in the world, would you want retire, heck no, you'd want the next band to have an even bigger hill to climb to get where you are.  I just don't see greatness retiring anytime soon, if ever.

Well, that's my 2 cents,

Andreas

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  The Stones sound horrible live and U2 still sounds great.  Their last album is one of my favorites.  The IE tour is my favorite tour of theirs.  I've seen most of them.  This is just one opinion but I think they have a lot more music in them.  For the IE tour they camped in Chicago for five shows, with days off in between those shows.  I think, and hope, we will see more of this and less hitting as many cities as possible.  It was mentioned Bono spoke of his brush with mortality.  We've lost quite a few great musicians this past year.  It made me think of my mortality.  He's a rock star.  Maybe it's hitting him even more.  I don't think we can even begin to speculate their future.  I do hope they don't go the route of the Stones because that band is a joke.  The Stones opened Summerfest, in Milwaukee, a few years back.  Ticket prices were $500 or more.  They were paid five million dollars for one show.  Nobody is worth that.  I had friends who went and said they sounded awful.  U2 still sounds great.  As for REM...I like a lot of the music they put out after Bill Berry left the band.  I saw a clip of them live recently and they sounded good.

Edited by Manohlive
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a interesting, albeit really sad thought. Undeniable that they are significantly closer to the end than the start. No doubting that. But what a ride.... 

It is probably why I haven't entirely brought into this seemingly new and surprisingly vehement emergence of a backlash from within the hardcore faithful towards the band of late. Sure the ticket sale process could have been infinitely better (to say the least), perhaps the JT shows would have been better not wedged between these two records and tours and absolutely it would have been devastated not getting a ticket. 100% understandable and gut wrenching. But....... They are still here. There are still shows. They are still recording and they are still touring. The alternative is much tougher to face. It could have all ended long ago. I know that it is difficult to try and follow that line when you suffer the pain of missing out on a ticket, but it is worth a thought. 

I remember listening to 40 from that final show of Popmart back in 98. Back when you paid exorbitant amounts for a bootleg in a record store. It felt in honestly like it could have ended right then. A slow, almost mournful version of the tune. On the back of record that struggled in the US. And a tour that had its fair share of difficulties in cutting though its own ambition. A tour where they copped a lot of flacks in places. I loved Popmart though, but that song felt so sad at that time and I couldn't help wondering if the next move was the lads head off to the mansion in the south of France and buy a winery. So everything since then has been nothing but a bonus. And anything after Experience would continue that theme. Let alone the vast amount of material locked in the vault somewhere. 

Keep in mind I'm an Australian fan, so suffice to say I haven't even had a chance at a ticket to show here for a very long time. 

Right now I think us hardcore fans need to take a step back for a second and remember why we are actually even here in the first place. Throw on a record on, turn it up and get lost in it again. Let The Fly rattle the windows. Get drunk and belt out One. Get even drunker and croon With or Without You whilst kicking out an imaginary microphone stand Rattle and Hum style. Nothing is guaranteed, there is no entitlement - but there are a shit load of tunes to fall back on.    

Edited by inztantkarma
fixing an error
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last tour (ex JT 30) on Songs of Innocence, the band were, to echo Manolive, in great form. There is such a rich vein of doom n gloom that surround those that no longer see U2 as 'relevant'. They remain very relevant as is evident in ticket sales etc etc - yeah, remember them - that's people still wanting to see them , buying tickets!

My favourite show was once such n such, but it was very definitely seeing them live indoors in Belfast (2015) - not because it was, for the first time in a very long time, close to home - but because they were very good live - and remained so this year as they toured JT.

Nobody goes on forever though, hard fact to take for us all if we dwell too long - but we're blessed that we have had these 4 guys for so long. That's special, and very endearing. You feel, or at least I do, that you've grown up with them even though I don't actually know them personally.

Let's just go along with whatever. Nothing lasts forever.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, yardie said:

Last tour (ex JT 30) on Songs of Innocence, the band were, to echo Manolive, in great form. There is such a rich vein of doom n gloom that surround those that no longer see U2 as 'relevant'. They remain very relevant as is evident in ticket sales etc etc - yeah, remember them - that's people still wanting to see them , buying tickets!

My favourite show was once such n such, but it was very definitely seeing them live indoors in Belfast (2015) - not because it was, for the first time in a very long time, close to home - but because they were very good live - and remained so this year as they toured JT.

Nobody goes on forever though, hard fact to take for us all if we dwell too long - but we're blessed that we have had these 4 guys for so long. That's special, and very endearing. You feel, or at least I do, that you've grown up with them even though I don't actually know them personally.

Let's just go along with whatever. Nothing lasts forever.

I knew I wasn't the only one, yardie.

On 11/1/2017 at 3:03 PM, jreed said:

I believe U2 is greatest band in the world.  I haven't seen or heard a better band in my lifetime and I don't think I ever will.

Respect to jreed for the above.

The Stones let themselves get larger than life and sank.  They defined a major part of rock and roll  They lived it to the hilt and became caricatures. The Beatles could not play live shows yet still put out Sgt. Pepper's and other greatest albums of all time.  They disbanded and then each made his mark as a solo artist.

Bruce Springsteen is still doing it.  Some may criticize his being on Broadway, but I think he earned it by being who he is and remaining true to it. (I say that humbly.)

U2 seem to be the same band they always have been as well. (Again, said humbly.)   My hope, and belief, is that they will evolve as time progresses. 

I think we've at least a few more peaks to their chain.  They are the band that sang, and still sings, "Gloria In Excelsis.".  They also ask, "How long?"  For me, that is sacred.  U2 is special.

God bless the Irish.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t think anyone can shut Bono up and I’m sure they have tons of unreleased music for the future.  Songs of Ascent may have already been completed. 

Anyways you may be right, but I sure hope not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 02/11/2017 at 4:03 AM, jreed said:

Disclaimer: I believe U2 is greatest band in the world.  I haven't seen or heard a better band in my lifetime and I don't think I ever will.  Also, I'm a paying fan club member and own almost everything they've ever released.  If I don't have a physical copy of it, I'm sure I have it digitally.

I believe U2 will release one more album after Experience and call it day.  I'm thinking it's just a matter of time, I think they know they have nothing more to prove.  Quite frankly, I hope they do what R.E.M. did.  Put out one last amazing album and then call it a day.  Everybody shakes hands and goes home.  I also don't believe that the band can keep up the current touring pace at their age.  A U2 tour lasts anywhere from 2 to 3 years.  In my opinion, the I+E tour has never actually stopped.  I would go so far as to say that The Joshua Tree 2017 tour was part of it.  I would also argue that the stadium shows that were done were supposed to be I+E shows.  Do I want them to retire?  Selfishly, yes!  There is a quality U2 possesses that no other band possesses, that goes for The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, Zeppelin, Pearl Jam, Oasis, Nirvana, and anyone else you want to add.  That quality is nobility.  Their music is noble and when it's played or heard, it reaches out for the very best of everyone of us.  That just doesn't exist anymore.  I don't want this band to go the way of the Stones.  I love the Stones, but those guys look a little ridiculous these days.  I just don't want to see Bono and The Edge trying to run around the stage at the age of 70.  I'd be afraid it'd cheapen their music somehow, and knowing how the general public hates a sell out, it would look as though they have gone that route.  Finally, Bono keeps referring to this "brush with his own mortality" recently, which I don't know if you've been keeping score at home, that makes three times recently that Bono has almost met a fatal end.  If it was bad then, then that has to have some effect on his body, and I'm not a fan of the idea of Bono collapsing and dying on stage.  Some of you will wholeheartedly disagree with me and I welcome that.  I'd love to hear another perspective.  Thanks for taking a second to read this crazy ramble.  I hope you're all well in the U2niverse!

I'm a few months late to this thread, so sorry for that. 

firstly I can't believe you included Oasis & Nirvana in your list of great bands. sadly Nirvana weren't around long enough to develop like Pearl Jam did, they have 3 albums? Oasis, I know of their first two albums but they really aren't up there with the like of The Beatles, Stones, Zeppelin... Pearl Jam are ok but I think MetallicA deserve a spot in bands that have lasted a long time and delivered great music over several decades. I wouldn't like to see U2 at 70 and I don't think we will but I think we are getting ahead of ourselves. right now  U2 are turning 58 or 57 this year. I saw David BOWIE like when he was 57 and he was fantastic! this was before his heart scare. even though he didn't tour again after the REALITY tour Bowie released 2 more albums. 2013's 'The Next Day' and 2016's 'Blackstar' both of which are great albums. 

I think U2 can make music for as long as they want. touring, I think they'll be fine for a few more years. these brushes with mortality that Bono has had. it's a part of life. I've had one myself. we all are going to die one day.

when David BOWIE passed away I wasn't ready for it... it hit me like a brick. I was like 'a music world without BOWIE in it... this sucks!Cry.gif.58ade9145057452e253ad825558a34d0.gif < that was me for 5 minutes after finding out the sad news.

your post is similar to ones I've seen on MetallicA's forum. though they are a couple of years younger, MetallicA get a real physical workout onstage (I'd say more so than U2) fans are wondering how long can they keep this up live?? with U2 & MetallicA I don't think they will ever stop making music... it's just in their blood. when they get in their early to mid 60's I think we may see a slow down, more so than what we see now. but hey, every band and musician is different. who knows? :Zoo_Car:

Edited by BigBunny
speeling misteaks
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/23/2017 at 11:08 PM, inztantkarma said:

Right now I think us hardcore fans need to take a step back for a second and remember why we are actually even here in the first place. Throw on a record on, turn it up and get lost in it again. Let The Fly rattle the windows. Get drunk and belt out One. Get even drunker and croon With or Without You whilst kicking out an imaginary microphone stand Rattle and Hum style. Nothing is guaranteed, there is no entitlement - but there are a shit load of tunes to fall back on.

Yep, I updated my profile and I couldn’t decide on a favorite song, or “single” (what’s the difference?).... that’s troubling to me.  Am I a hardcore fan or not?!  If I dish out all this money to go to these concerts I ought to have several favorites...

I think that I should listen to a lot of them and come up with many, many favorites and one supreme favorite.

I think that I should avoid the “getting drunk” part, though.  Too many calories and I need to fit into my ei concert t-shirt by May 22 Chicago show...plus alcohol does funny things to me...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You NEVER know what U2 are capable of pulling out of the hat.  They are on an upward curve again with their last couple of albums and the next one could be another classic.

I hope they don't retire yet, I'm the same age as most of the band and I would like to thing the energy is still there for touring.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope they pull good songs out of that hat.  IE and SOE are weak and so generic.  Please give us one more classic and retire.  Best go out on top.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this has been interpreted in two ways, whether the band can physically do it or creatively do it.

I think physically they could keep playing live for a few more years without a problem, as musicians I don't think they would slow down. With the exception of Larry the show isn't that physical for them as say Metallica as mentioned earlier. How Bonos voice and presence will hold up over the next few years though remains to be seen and that will just come down to age same as it would for anyone. They famously said the only way out of U2 is in a box so I don't think they intend to stop anytime soon, there are financial gains to be made remaining active but I don't think that would solely motivate them.

Creatively I think that is really hard to predict, every U2 album is a leap off the edge (no pun intended) for everyone and I think it really can go either way these days. I don't think I'll ever abandon them but I do find myself wincing a bit more listening to some of newer songs and Bono's soundbites. A friend of mine, another huge fan,  were talking about it recently and I said I think U2 have entered their second Rattle & Hum phase, the huge rockstar mega band, collaborating with other 'influential' artists or trying too hard to find a new audience if you will when the old one is perfectly happy and can easily sustain them.

U2 look more like rockstars now then ever, leather jackets and trousers, studded belts and playing music like it, almost an old band trying to sound young, whereas if you look at TUF, JT or AB it sounds like a young band sounding wiser than their years. 

I personally think they have more in them musically but I think they need to almost pair things back and do it for themselves. Just being a band without trying to be the world's band.

But it is hard to imagine them not being around though and for all the flack they get, especially here at home, people won't realise how important they were until they aren't around anymore.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, berrigan2101 said:

I personally think they have more in them musically but I think they need to almost pair things back and do it for themselves. Just being a band without trying to be the world's band.

I think that is very well said and very true.  How do you think they could do that? 

Edited by Manohlive

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Manohlive said:

I think that is very well said and very true.  How do you think they could do that? 

One studio, one producer, no overcooking it, no big social/political statement and no talk until a release date is confirmed. I think there has been too much talk of music and not enough music (I'd still love to hear the Rick Rubin material) which raises albums up to ridiculous expectations and pressure (commercially and artistically) that no band can live up, even the mighty U2.

They could release The Joshua Tree tomorrow and it wouldn't sell 20 million copies simply because that musical economy doesn't exist anymore, nothing to do with the quality of the music itself so they could start by removing that burden of a 'big' release. It would probably be panned too because it will have been talked about for three years without us hearing a note and by the time the music arrives the media can be a bit U2-d out. The bands celebrity entity can surpass the music at times and people are almost conditioned to hate them as a result. The NME and the Guardian simply won't write a good word about them, the album reviews were practically written in advance if you ask me.

I think if they said, here is our new album, some will like it, some won't and that's ok because we know people are still with us. 

I trust them to make the music after that.

Edited by berrigan2101
grammar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, berrigan2101 said:

One studio, one producer, no overcooking it, no big social/political statement and no talk until a release date is confirmed. I think there has been too much talk of music and not enough music (I'd still love to hear the Rick Rubin material) which raises albums up to ridiculous expectations and pressure (commercially and artistically) that no band can live up, even the mighty U2.

They could release The Joshua Tree tomorrow and it wouldn't sell 20 million copies simply because that musical economy doesn't exist anymore, nothing to do with the quality of the music itself so they could start by removing that burden of a 'big' release. It would probably be panned too because it will have been talked about for three years without us hearing a note and by the time the music arrives the media can be a bit U2-d out. The bands celebrity entity can surpass the music at times and people are almost conditioned to hate them as a result. The NME and the Guardian simply won't write a good word about them, the album reviews were practically written in advance if you ask me.

I think if they said, here is our new album, some will like it, some won't and that's ok because we know people are still with us. 

I trust them to make the music after that.

I think I took what you said out of context.  I like the new album.  I live in America.  I'm not aware of reviews and hype, save what I read on U2.com.  I also don't pay attention to whomever produces whatever until after I'm over the initial high of the new release, and I've formed my own opinion.  I'm not saying you have done this.  I got sick of artistic works being taken hostage by others who live on the peripheral boundaries.  For me, this happened in the nineties when, 'grunge',  hit the runways of fashion designers.  I decided I need to keep the music for myself and F#@k what the periodicals and TV say about it.  

I forget that it's very different in other countries.

I think they'll be making music until they are no more. The periodicals and TV people will be saying how wonderful U2 was where said leeches once clung to every single vulnerable spot possible and criticized U2 because it meant better ratings.

I love this band.  I don't like talking about the end.  It will happen, hopefully, as the powers that be see fit.

Edited by Manohlive
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Manohlive said:

I think I took what you said out of context.  I like the new album.  I live in America.  I'm not aware of reviews and hype, save what I read on U2.com.  I also don't pay attention to whomever produces whatever until after I'm over the initial high of the new release, and I've formed my own opinion.  I'm not saying you have done this.  I got sick of artistic works being taken hostage by others who live on the peripheral boundaries.  For me, this happened in the nineties when, 'grunge',  hit the runways of fashion designers.  I decided I need to keep the music for myself and F#@k what the periodicals and TV say about it.  

I forget that it's very different in other countries.

I think they'll be making music until they are no more. The periodicals and TV people will be saying how wonderful U2 was where said leeches once clung to every single vulnerable spot possible and criticized U2 because it meant better ratings.

I love this band.  I don't like talking about the end.  It will happen, hopefully, as the powers that be see fit.

Haha I think we have both gotten our signals crossed:D I have seen as many good reviews as I have bad for the last two albums and like you I make up my own mind after I hear them and I think there are some great songs there but I also have an opinion as to why they sound the way they do.

My point was the really about focusing on music and scaling back as they move forward and not playing into the role of being one of the worlds biggest rock bands . Anyone who puts an artistic product into the world will generate responses by the media which is purely subjective and when you operate at the scale of U2 everything is magnified, positive and negative.

But I believe it is a two way street and that's what I meant by a lot of talk or talk of music and the music coming second. You can feed the machine by making grand statements, verbally or as an act (i.e. the SOI iTunes release) and those will be the things that get the attention and the music is held to impossible standards or may even by ignored.

People have mentioned the Rolling Stones and that's what I fear might potentially happen to U2 where they become a caricature of a big rock band or a celebrities for celebrity sake and not for what they originally made their mark with. People like ourselves will always talk about their great songs, albums, tours etc but the press will play their part too as they are the ones who document it and I think they can do more to protect their legacy for the future than trying to be ’popular’ now by scaling back like I mentioned earlier.

 

Edited by berrigan2101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, berrigan2101 said:

Haha I think we have both gotten our signals crossed:D I have seen as many good reviews as I have bad for the last two albums and like you I make up my own mind after I hear them and I think there are some great songs there but I also have an opinion as to why they sound the way they do.

My point was the really about focusing on music and scaling back as they move forward and not playing into the role of being one of the worlds biggest rock bands . Anyone who puts an artistic product into the world will generate responses by the media which is purely subjective and when you operate at the scale of U2 everything is magnified, positive and negative.

But I believe it is a two way street and that's what I meant by a lot of talk or talk of music and the music coming second. You can feed the machine by making grand statements, verbally or as an act (i.e. the SOI iTunes release) and those will be the things that get the attention and the music is held to impossible standards or may even by ignored.

People have mentioned the Rolling Stones and that's what I fear might potentially happen to U2 where they become a caricature of a big rock band or a celebrities for celebrity sake and not for what they originally made their mark with. People like ourselves will always talk about their great songs, albums, tours etc but the press will play their part too as they are the ones who document it and I think they can do more to protect their legacy for the future than trying to be ’popular’ now by scaling back like I mentioned earlier.

 

That is what I thought you meant.  I agree.  They are a very large scale rock band.  I think the thing that differentiates them from the Stones is that they are still putting out great music.  I realize this is subjective.  Many people love the music.  I can't remember anything anyone liked by the Stones in a very long time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It takes a lot for me to say this guys, but I agree with the earlier poster. On a purely selfish level I actually think this would be the perfect time to call it a day. Everyone of the band have major interests outside of music (or the band) which they can pursue if so wished. Don't get me wrong....I absolutely love SOE and think that songwriting wise, Bono is on top form......just wonder how much longer the old body will hold up? I LOVE U2....(I don't say that lightly). They have been a constant in my life for about 30 years. I would just like them to go out on a huge high!!!!! Peace.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

maybe this will be the last tour proper , and who can blame them . I reckon the albums will carry on a good while , maybe a change of format but they won't just stop composing , how can you , they apparently all get on so no issues there , Adams the only one with young children , again sure he would want to carry on , seems to have taken on more promotion this time anyway . 

Still think live shows will carry on but maybe not tours possibly 2/3 shows and a month off another 2/3 and so on . I agree the stadium tour was supposed to be I@E not Joshua but circumstance , not just Trump took over , Adams baby , Bono's health and so on .....  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.