U2 Experience + Innocence Tour **Discussion Only // No Ticket Sales or Requests**

JOEOLEARY

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Nights are so long...

silence goes on

Sonny678

JOEOLEARY wrote:

Your Daddy’s a sailor, never comes home

I don't know which is worse. Someone whose giving the thumbs to very unfunny one liners. Are someone trying to explain a very unfunny one liner. It's just gets worse. Thats what he meant. Its even worse then I thought. Oh the one liner unfunny think their funny brigade, what can you do with them. In musical terms they are the jedward of the Internet. Annoying irrevelant and think their funny and cool but their neither.

JOEOLEARY

Sonny678 wrote: »

I don't know which is worse. Someone whose giving the thumbs to very unfunny one liners. Are someone trying to explain a very unfunny one liner. It's just gets worse. Thats what he meant. Its even worse then I thought. Oh the one liner unfunny think their funny brigade, what can you do with them. In musical terms they are the jedward of the Internet. Annoying irrevelant and think their funny and cool but their neither.

What you're calling unfunny...............is actually a lyrical genius at work. But hey, if you want to believe you're right............

Oh and the fact that you're getting offended by song lyrics when you're trying to have an argument about song lyrics is hilarious!!

Sonny678

JOEOLEARY wrote:

What you're calling unfunny...............is actually a lyrical genius at work. But hey, if you want to believe you're right............

Joe. I wasn't having a go at you. Thanks for explaining the unfunny line. It more the one line brigade . Criticise away if you want. But these people who have a list of 1 liners ready to pounce on anyone if they slip up is like how could you be bothered. It's just never funny.

Sonny678

Just a side note. I wonder are U2 thinking off breaking up. U2 always seemed to do trilogy of sorts with records

1 Boy October War
2 The Unforgettable Fire The Joshua Tree Rattle and Hum (I know its less so feeling of a triology but it was one of sorts)
3 Achtung Baby Zooropa Pop
4 ATYCLB HTDAAB NLOTH
5 Songs of Innocence Songs of Experience Songs of Ascent????


Definatly feels like they are doing a triology or sorts st the moment. Songs of Innocence was looking back at their younger selves in Dublin in late 70s. The current album seems to be letters to Bonos loved ones in the present. They have done recordings with Rick Rubin. They were never really finished and they were given the title the Songs of Ascent. Could they finish this and what are the chances of the next album been called the Songs of Ascent. The end of this triology. A kind of farewell album. U2 will then retire.


For where do they go next?. They are still a great live band. Better then any band half their age live. But I did think in the Joshua Tree tour like Springsteen last tour, both artist where showing their age a bit. If this is a triology. Where do they go next?. They could go and do more avant garde albums similar to Passengers. But again as they grow older their recording talents will diminish further. And they will surely start to release crap albums . And imagine the reviews they will get from some certain rock critics and their detractors then. They are on the verge of becoming the New Rolling Stones. Massive tours playing the greatest hits. They could do a 30th anniversary tour of Achtung Baby and a new version of Zoo TV. They could do that. But they did do a 20th anniversary of Achtung baby. They played it pretty much at Glastonbury. The Joshua Tree tour this year worked. With all the things going on the world, The Joshua Tree was again relevant. And it was an album that conquered the world. The tour idea worked. I don't know if Achtung Baby which is their best album would work as well.


So could they be thinking of breaking. This idea of U2 breaking up has been discussed since Rattle and Hum. In 1989 when Bono in the point talked about dreaming it up again many thought that this was the end. Also at the end of the Pop mart people where talking about them breaking up. Bono in the latest interviews looks very old. He looks haggard with the lines on his face. I think this health scare he had has left him rattled a bit. Could they be thinking of breaking up after the next album?. They could keep on going. Tour after tour breaking records. But as a recording band their output in the studio will inevitably diminish to where The Rolling Stones The Who are now. They release an album nobody cares it's piss poor.


If I was U2 , I would break up with the next album. Do a farewell tour. Finish up in the UK with a concert in Knebworth. And do a couple of final concerts here in Pairc Ui Chaoimh Nowlan Park Pearse Stadium Belfast Slane Castle and finish up in Croke Park. They would get a great reception . They could make a film of the whole tour with a proper director maybe like Scorcese or someone of his ilk. And do something what no other band has done their size. Break up with no rows, no member of the group leaving or dying Simply breaking up on their own terms. It would be a massive event.


And it would be good for their legacy. U2 have been big for too long. They have been the biggest band in the World for nearly 30 years. The next longest would be The Beatles and they were the biggest band in the world for only 7 years. U2 have been to big. Always there . They haven't had a time to go in qnd out of fashion. Every group goes through periods when they are in fashion and go out of fashion. I guarantee if U2 broke up after the next tour, ten years later there stature and place in rock history will grow. And U2 have always been obsessed about their place in music history. If they stay together they will become the new Rolling Stones. It would be hard to give it up. Record tours. But I wouldn't be surprised they're thinking of this. When you look at the latest albums and their themes, it could be hinting at this. The best way to increase your stature as a group or an artist is die young or break up.

Sonny678

Anyway I just got my U2 CD. I'm going to spend the evening listening to the album. You cannot beat that feeling when you get a new album and listen to it for the first time.

Wooderson

Nights are so long.

dublinman1990

There is a few photos about the U2 special on the BBC from the Daily Mail.









http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-5145941/U2-recreate-iconic-Beatles-Abbey-Road-BBC-special.html

but1er

Pop up gig in Milan next, what's the chances of getting a pop up gig at the luas opening on Saturday?

psychozeb

Still waiting on my vinyl preorder from official site,thank god I bought deluxe CD last weekend. Hope it was worth it for the pre sale codes.

Sonny678

A couple of listens to the album for the first time tonight. It's definatly a grower. It's definitely one of their best albums since 2000. The best part of the album is the mid section on eg Summer of Love Showman Red Flag Day The Little things Landlady and Blackout. The singles are the worst songs on the album. Bono voice sounds good. It does have that minimalist production sound that is in vogue at the moment. So not enough Edge. It's seems like almost a Bono solo album at times. The highlight r the bass on Blackout, its really heavy and great. Showman is irritating catchy. Red Flag Day sounds like 1983 War transported to 2017. And it works real well. The little things is the emotional centrepiece album and does collapse a bit at the end, but it is one those great ballads U2 do well. The negatives r Bono long winded song titles. Bonos naff lyrics at times. The singles and songs released before the album release are poor. Get out your own Way is a really rerun of Beautiful Day. And American Soul is just boring. Love is bigger is to much of a node to Coldplay. It's not masterpiece. It's no Joshua Tree. But it's a good album. It's a grower. And probaly as good as any album produced by a band their size and at their stage of a career. They still have it.

q2xv9rjei4awgb

I like Get Out Of Your Own Way tbh.

The melodic sound of the guitar and the feel of it gets me along with Edge's harmonies in the chorus.

American Soul... Cannot help but want to bounce and have a headbang during the verses tbh.

You say Bono solo album, I think it's an album where the rhythm section breathes. Adam and Larry sound absolutely brilliant on this

Anyways, it's good. It's not a reggae album produced in a small garage by Steve Lillywhite good (****ing still laughing at that) but, whatever.

"Sounds like Coldplay"
No, it sounds like U2

The Nal

Sonny678 wrote: »

They are still a great live band. Better then any band half their age live.

Behave

Sonny678

Tomas White Suspect wrote:

You say Bono solo album, I think it's an album where the rhythm section breathes. Adam and Larry sound absolutely brilliant on this

Agree. Adam and Larry sound really good. But both are always a bit underrated. Like Joyce and Rourke in the Smiths Adam and Larry get very little attention compared to the other two but are brillant in their own way. Could be Adams and Larry's best album since Pop overall.

Sonny678

The Nal wrote:

Behave

Rock music is in a dire state. Where are the great bands great albums great songs compared to the past. And yes U2 are still great live band. Always have been. And yes they can still do the business live better then most bands half their age. Allot of great young musicians in music at the moment. But no characters no great songs compared to smells like teen spirit or classic albums like Nevermind. Arcade Fire are probaly best band around. But they wouldn't even be in the top 100 bands of all time.

q2xv9rjei4awgb

Sonny678 wrote: »

Rock music is in a dire state. Where are the great bands great albums great songs compared to the past. And yes U2 are still great live band. Always have been. And yes they can still do the business live better then most bands half their age. Allot of great young musicians in music at the moment. But no characters no great songs compared to smells like teen spirit or classic albums like Nevermind. Arcade Fire are probaly best band around. But they wouldn't even be in the top 100 bands of all time.

Give it time....

sally cinnamon89

Sonny678 wrote: »

Rock music is in a dire state. Where are the great bands great albums great songs compared to the past. And yes U2 are still great live band. Always have been. And yes they can still do the business live better then most bands half their age. Allot of great young musicians in music at the moment. But no characters no great songs compared to smells like teen spirit or classic albums like Nevermind. Arcade Fire are probaly best band around. But they wouldn't even be in the top 100 bands of all time.

Yes because Bono is a real character. Pull your head out of your arse.

Wooderson

Sonny you deal in such absolutes. Its fascinating, really.

Seve OB

sally cinnamon89 wrote: »

Old man shakes fists at anything modern

I think you need to get some perspective

i think you are the one who needs some perspective. im quite happy with modern stuff, sure i use my ipod all the time dont i

Seve OB

Sonny678 wrote: »

What does that even mean. It's like some people have these lists of 1 line put downs and just spend their time posting them on the net with these not so funny one liners. I don't mind if someone is actually funny. But like what does that even mean?. I won't go away I'm all alone. Honestly how do you come up with such brilliance.

Sonny678 wrote: »

I don't know which is worse. Someone whose giving the thumbs to very unfunny one liners. Are someone trying to explain a very unfunny one liner. It's just gets worse. Thats what he meant. Its even worse then I thought. Oh the one liner unfunny think their funny brigade, what can you do with them. In musical terms they are the jedward of the Internet. Annoying irrevelant and think their funny and cool but their neither.

Sonny678 wrote: »

Joe. I wasn't having a go at you. Thanks for explaining the unfunny line. It more the one line brigade . Criticise away if you want. But these people who have a list of 1 liners ready to pounce on anyone if they slip up is like how could you be bothered. It's just never funny.

Wow Sonny, take a chill pill will ya. It was a joke. A funny one. Of course some people got it, you clearly didn't.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYbKwMlT1R4

Sonny678

sally cinnamon89 wrote:

Yes because Bono is a real character. Pull your head out of your arse.

Well yes Bono is. Post punk he is one of the best front men. U2 of course or un rock n Roll in the Sex drugs and rock n Roll ideal of rock n roll. But we had that done to death from Keith Moon to Motley Crue. U2 showed a different side to rock. And it has had influence. Look at Radiohead Muse Travis Keane Embrace Snow Patrol Coldplay. All the biggest bands in Britian since around 2000. All kind of un rock n Roll. None of them really Sex drugs and rock n Roll. Also musically influenced by U2. But overall Bono live post punk he as good as front man live as there has been.

But when I'm talking about character and great songs great albums. I'm not talking about U2. U2 best days are behind them. I'm talking about rock music in general. It's decline.

Sonny678

Seve OB wrote:

Wow Sonny, take a chill pill will ya. It was a joke. A funny one. Of course some people got it, you clearly didn't.

Sorry Seve. Honestly never heard of Sonny’s Dream. Never heard of it. So I didn't know what people where talking about. I get it now. Sorry for the overreaction.

The Nal

Sonny678 wrote: »

Arcade Fire are probaly best band around.

Behave.

Sonny678

Wooderson wrote:

Sonny you deal in such absolutes. Its fascinating, really.

Its not really absolutes. It just saying the reality of the situation. Yes there are good musicians. Some interesting songs. Some decent albums. But where are all the great characters. But more importantly where are all the great bands. I'm talking about a Smiths or A Clash or The Jam or Sly and the Family Stone or ever Pulp or Pearl Jam would be nice. Look at the great cities in the UK. Where are the great bands from Manchester Liverpool and Glasgow. Even Dublin which has long tradition of rock music. Where are the great bands gone? Name all these great bands and great singles. And great albums. A Nevermind OK Computer Achtung Baby London Calling Hunky Dory Revolver. I don't see it.

I suspose rock music is over 50 years old and rock n roll over 60 years. It's had an good innings. Unless some great rock movement suddenly appears it's final chapter has been written. There has been a few signs of life since 2000 but they were false damns. The Strokes debut album is a classic. But like The Stone Roses they only had 1 great album in their locker. Artic Monkeys showed potential but it never has been truly realised. Radiohead have gone up their own backside since OK Computer. While The Libertines where music press darlings even though they hadn't recorded 1 great actually even 1 very good album . Or even 1 great song.
Where are the Smiths REM or The Who. Or even an Jesus and The Mary Chain. Or even a Pulp or Manic Street Preachers. Rock music has had its day. Coldplay are pretty much all this wrong with rock music . Dull lyrics songs albums. Dull dull dull.

Sonny678

The Nal wrote:

Behave.

That's what I mean Arcade Fire are a great band now. But in terms of overall I would say they wouldn't get in the top 100 bands of all time. Wrong. They wouldn't get in the top 200 bands of all time. Arcade Fire are just ripping of 80 music eg indie rock and Springsteen. Overall they are a good solid rock band in the overall scheme of things . Nothing more nothing less.

Wooderson

Sonny678 wrote: »

Its not really absolutes. It just saying the reality of the situation. Yes there are good musicians. Some interesting songs. Some decent albums. But where are all the great characters. But more importantly where are all the great bands. I'm talking about a Smiths or A Clash or The Jam or Sly and the Family Stone or ever Pulp or Pearl Jam would be nice. Look at the great cities in the UK. Where are the great bands from Manchester Liverpool and Glasgow. Even Dublin which has long tradition of rock music. Where are the great bands gone? Name all these great bands and great singles. And great albums. A Nevermind OK Computer Achtung Baby London Calling Hunky Dory Revolver. I don't see it.

I suspose rock music is over 50 years old and rock n roll over 60 years. It's had an good innings. Unless some great rock movement suddenly appears it's final chapter has been written. There has been a few signs of life since 2000 but they were false damns. The Strokes debut album is a classic. But like The Stone Roses they only had 1 great album in their locker. Artic Monkeys showed potential but it never has been truly realised. Radiohead have gone up their own backside since OK Computer. While The Libertines where music press darlings even though they hadn't recorded 1 great actually even 1 very good album . Or even 1 great song.
Where are the Smiths REM or The Who. Or even an Jesus and The Mary Chain. Or even a Pulp or Manic Street Preachers. Rock music has had its day. Coldplay are pretty much all this wrong with rock music . Dull lyrics songs albums. Dull dull dull.

I like your thoughts, but youre coming across like the pub dckhead U2 fan rather than wry and knowledgeable music lover you might really be. Chill.

q2xv9rjei4awgb

sally cinnamon89 wrote: »

Yes because Bono is a real character. Pull your head out of your arse.

No really arsed where the discussion has gone but..

He didn't mention Bono in his post

MisterAnarchy

Sonny678 wrote: »

But more importantly where are all the great bands.

The Killers are for me the best band in the world .
The new album isn't as good as previous ones ,but their output over the last 15 years has been phenomenal ,hardly a poor song released.
I saw them in Dublin and Belfast last month and the Dublin gig was phenomenal and that was with only half the band .
Even Brandon's suit reminded me of Mr McPhisto !

q2xv9rjei4awgb

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

The Killers are for me the best band in the world .
The new album isn't as good as previous ones ,but their output over the last 15 years has been phenomenal ,hardly a poor song released.
I saw them in Dublin and Belfast last month and the Dublin gig was phenomenal and that was with only half the band .
Even Brandon's suit reminded me of Mr McPhisto !

Not The Killers though is it?

Two of them left. Only the drummer and Brendan remain.

Like Rossi and Parfitt without Lancaster and Coghlan

Not that it takes away from the gig mind yuu. Glad you enjoyed

SoundOfSilence

Despise the term supergroup. Makes music out to be a competition.

phonypony

SoundOfSilence wrote: »

Despise the term supergroup. Makes music out to be a competition.

Especially when it's used wrong as it has been in this thread. It does not mean a hugely successful group, it's intended to describe a group comprised of previously successful artists; Wilburys, Mike & The Mechanics, etc... U2 ain't a supergroup.

phonypony

I find the album generally pretty dire and a difficult listen. As a fan I want to like it. No doubt some of the songs will grow legs and mature as they play them live, that's what U2 does best these days. The album just feels like they're going through the motions, meeting contract obligations and churning out whatever ideas they have. It's a shame; they are still capable of great things. If they had released SOI+E as a single album, it would have had far less (probably no) filler.

johnpatrick81

Sonny678

phonypony wrote: »

Especially when it's used wrong as it has been in this thread. It does not mean a hugely successful group, it's intended to describe a group comprised of previously successful artists; Wilburys, Mike & The Mechanics, etc... U2 ain't a supergroup.

I know supergroup means more Wilburys etc. But just what I was trying to draw attention that U2 are the last massive rock group in the vein of Pink Floyd Led Zepplin The Who REM The Stones The Beatles. Groups who produced some all time classics albums that conquered the world. Sold albums by 10s of millions. Had critical acclaim. World breaking tours. And everyone knows each member of the bands name. The first was the Beatles the last one was U2. Nirvana were probaly the last American group in this league. Radiohead are probaly the last British group. But I would question if Radiohead ever were as big as U2 or The Who in America. They weren't.

Coldplay are probaly the only band at the moment that would have similar sucess to the above mentioned. But they have yet to produce a stone cold classic album like Sergeant Peppers Who's Next Led Zepplin The Joshua Tree Dark Side of the Moon or Automatic for the People. You cannot mention them up with the above artists.

U2 are last of these type of groups. The Rolling Stones also but the Stones haven't produced a great album since early 70s and have been a greatest hits touring group since. Will we ever see a Led Zepplin or U2 again conquering both sides of the Atlantic. That's what I meant. But I understand why anyone would say that supergroup means Wilbury. It does. I used it wrongly. I just wanted to use a term to group all these massive iconic bands together. U2 would be the last great big massive iconic band in the mould of the Who or Pink Flyod or The Police even.

Sonny678

phonypony wrote: »

I find the album generally pretty dire and a difficult listen. As a fan I want to like it. No doubt some of the songs will grow legs and mature as they play them live, that's what U2 does best these days. The album just feels like they're going through the motions, meeting contract obligations and churning out whatever ideas they have. It's a shame; they are still capable of great things. If they had released SOI+E as a single album, it would have had far less (probably no) filler.

Stick with it. It's a grower. There's not enough Edge on the album. But the thing that surprises me about the album is it has allot of strong melodies. U2 in the 80s wouldn't have been able to write a song like The Showman. It's an 80 pop song in the mould of the awful Duran Duran or the underrated Mental as Anything. The Sweetest thing the original b side of one of the Joshua Tree singles was the closest they came to a pop song in the 80s. But now hitting near 60s and since 2000 they have become better at writing these type of songs. Now that might be a good thing for some but I would say people who like War U2 and 80s U2 would find that a bad thing. But for me writing a good pop song is very hard thing to do. And I think it's shows the talent U2 still have. But it is a diminishing talent .

Overall the album is a grower. It's gets better with every listen unlike songs of Innocence. And is one of their best since 2000. But the underrated No line on the Horizon probaly has better songs. And U2 sound like a rock band on that album. This album the production is minimal . Meaty rock songs like Breathe and NLOTH would be much superior then anything on the current album. And Moment of Surrender is one of U2 best songs since 2000. And would have walked on to their 80s or 90s albums. Magnificent is the last proper U2 style rock athnem. It should have been lead single. The problem was U2 never recovered from releasing the God awful mess of a song called get on your sexy boots or whatever it was called. One of the worst U2 songs ever. Eno thought Moment of Surrender was one of their best songs ever. Yet U2 wanted to re write Vertigo and ended up writing a messed up song , basically 3 songs stuck together in 1. This gave NLOTH a bad name , a bad impression . Undeservedly so.

Sonny678

phonypony wrote: »

I find the album generally pretty dire and a difficult listen. As a fan I want to like it. No doubt some of the songs will grow legs and mature as they play them live, that's what U2 does best these days. The album just feels like they're going through the motions, meeting contract obligations and churning out whatever ideas they have. It's a shame; they are still capable of great things. If they had released SOI+E as a single album, it would have had far less (probably no) filler.

I think also you could be right if SOI +E where a single album it would have been better. There is overlap with America Soul/Volcano and 13/Song for Someone. Some of the songs on Innocence are poor. Some good tracks like Every Breaking Wave Volcano and the excellent California. But the best song on the album ( one of U2 best since in 2000) is the The Troubles. For me The Troubles and Moment of Surrender would fit in with their 80s and 90s work. SOI AND SOE together could been seriously good. But I'm overall happy with SOE.

q2xv9rjei4awgb

Sonny678 wrote: »

I think also you could be right if SOI +E where a single album it would have been better. There is overlap with America Soul/Volcano and 13/Song for Someone. Some of the songs on Innocence are poor. Some good tracks like Every Breaking Wave Volcano and the excellent California. But the best song on the album ( one of U2 best since in 2000) is the The Troubles. For me The Troubles and Moment of Surrender would fit in with their 80s and 90s work. SOI AND SOE together could been seriously good. But I'm overall happy with SOE.

I wanna be locked in a room, with California on repeat!

Granted, it has a personal meaning to me that others won't get but, it's so simple yet so good!

The last 3 songs on SOI are, to me, absolute genius.

U2 albums always "grow" on me...This is one album that I'm still listening to from the get go.
Maybe it's the way the melody or lyrics catches you...I don't know..The groove on the verses of American Soul just makes me move

I'm skipping the best track on the album because it makes me go to a place I really don't wanna go to.

ArtSmart

Gonna wait for the Guilty Tour.

Wooderson

I’m not that interested in The Context which appears is the only thing that matters on this thread now. How “important” they are or aren’t isn’t important right now to me. I don’t get a shiver thinking where they compare. That’s not the love/fandom I engage in. It comes across cold, robotic and one dimensional to me.

I love the band. This record isn’t that great. It’s not a surprise. I don’t give a fiddlers where they rank in comparison to the ‘king Police.

Good morning.

thegreengoblin

Sonny678 wrote: »

Stick with it. It's a grower. There's not enough Edge on the album. But the thing that surprises me about the album is it has allot of strong melodies. U2 in the 80s wouldn't have been able to write a song like The Showman. It's an 80 pop song in the mould of the awful Duran Duran or the underrated Mental as Anything. The Sweetest thing the original b side of one of the Joshua Tree singles was the closest they came to a pop song in the 80s. But now hitting near 60s and since 2000 they have become better at writing these type of songs. Now that might be a good thing for some but I would say people who like War U2 and 80s U2 would find that a bad thing. But for me writing a good pop song is very hard thing to do. And I think it's shows the talent U2 still have. But it is a diminishing talent .

Overall the album is a grower. It's gets better with every listen unlike songs of Innocence. And is one of their best since 2000. But the underrated No line on the Horizon probaly has better songs. And U2 sound like a rock band on that album. This album the production is minimal . Meaty rock songs like Breathe and NLOTH would be much superior then anything on the current album. And Moment of Surrender is one of U2 best songs since 2000. And would have walked on to their 80s or 90s albums. Magnificent is the last proper U2 style rock athnem. It should have been lead single. The problem was U2 never recovered from releasing the God awful mess of a song called get on your sexy boots or whatever it was called. One of the worst U2 songs ever. Eno thought Moment of Surrender was one of their best songs ever. Yet U2 wanted to re write Vertigo and ended up writing a messed up song , basically 3 songs stuck together in 1. This gave NLOTH a bad name , a bad impression . Undeservedly so.

Agree 100 per cent with your thoughts on NLOTH. I've been listening to it a hell of a lot in the last week (a new album will always send me on a listening binge!) and it absolutely didn't get the credit it deserved at the time. Take out Boots, Stand up Comedy plus I'll Go Crazy and there's very little wrong with it actually.

And that's not taking into account the bizarre decision to leave Winter off the album. What were they thinking of?? It's a fantastic song...the strings at the start...the operatic vocals at the end are hairs on the back of your neck stuff. They've done it again with Book of your Heart. What did that great piece of music do to be relegated to a bonus track?

Sonny678

thegreengoblin wrote: »

Agree 100 per cent with your thoughts on NLOTH. I've been listening to it a hell of a lot in the last week (a new album will always send me on a listening binge!) and it absolutely didn't get the credit it deserved at the time. Take out Boots, Stand up Comedy plus I'll Go Crazy and there's very little wrong with it actually.

And that's not taking into account the bizarre decision to leave Winter off the album. What were they thinking of?? It's a fantastic song...the strings at the start...the operatic vocals at the end are hairs on the back of your neck stuff. They've done it again with Book of your Heart. What did that great piece of music do to be relegated to a bonus track?

Your right book of your heart should have been on the album as it is stronger then some of the tracks on the album. Book of your heart has that The Cure, Echo and the Bunny men feel to it, mid 1980s indie rock.

U2 have always done this. U2 and many great bands do this all the time. Leave some of their best songs of albums and instead the songs would have been placed as b sides on singles. Book of your Heart would have been kept as b side on a single in the past. But U2 r not really a sucessful singles band anymore.

They have left many great tracks like Book before of their albums. Like The Beatles ( Rain ) The Jam ( liza Radley ) and Oasis ( Master plan, Rockin Chair) U2 are one of those bands that produce great B sides. The Smiths are another band who produced great B sides eg Asleep, Rubber Ring. Other great U2 B sides eg Luminous Tree and Lady with the Spinning head . Both should have been on albums. But that what's make them a great band. Another band would have released Asleep as a single. The Smiths put it on a b side.

U2 greatest b side is love comes Tumbling Down. Which could be one U2 best songs ever. Other class U2 b sides are Hallelujah Here she comes, Walk to the Water, A Room at the Heartbreak Hotel and Blow your House Down. The second greatest B side ever is Rain by the Beatles. To this day it is pop guitar perfection. And Ringo sounds amazing on this song. The greatest b side ever has to I am the Walrus. Now that is a tune and a half. Other classic b sides would be The Beatles Revolution. And The Rolling Stones best b side was You cannot always get what you want which was the b side to the inferior Honky Tonk Woman . Three of my personal favs would be Gloria B Side from Vans first band Them ( It originally was a b side). And Ian Dury and The Blockhead b side to Hit me with your Rhythm stick the rather excellent There ain't half been some Clever Bastards. Oasis Fade Away b side to Cigarettes and Alcohol was great fun also.

In summary bands who have produced great b sides would have been U2 The Beatles The Jam The Smiths Oasis and also Pearl Jam have a few tasty b sides also. Radiohead also have some great b sides with the songs Fog and Talk show Host and Prince also has some great b sides eg 17 Days, Irresistible Bitch.

Sonny678

Wooderson wrote: »

I’m not that interested in The Context which appears is the only thing that matters on this thread now. How “important” they are or aren’t isn’t important right now to me. I don’t get a shiver thinking where they compare. That’s not the love/fandom I engage in. It comes across cold, robotic and one dimensional to me.

I love the band. This record isn’t that great. It’s not a surprise. I don’t give a fiddlers where they rank in comparison to the ‘king Police.

Good morning.

Ahh Poor Woody did I upset you while your eating your Weetabix or Coca Pops or whatever you have breakfast ( Cornflakes is still the number 1 cereal in my book. Sorry I shouldn't say this as you don't like comparisons. ).

Firstly I didn't think you had to agree to a certain direction when you wrote on this forum. If you don't like the direction it has taken . Don't read it. Boards ie has many flaws. But one of it great strenghts is you can take any forum in what ever direction you want. Long may it continue.

Yes of course music is a gut feeling. It's spiritual. It's touchs one deep down in ones gut , soul , heart and spirit etc etc. Its all about emotions and feelings. Sometimes it make you feel happy . Sometimes it makes you feel sad. It might bring back a happy memory other times a sad memory. It is mysterious it is life affirming. It is fecking brillant in every way possible. But like everything there are many sides to music. The great thing about music you can take whatever you want from a song good bad or indifferent.

You might not like the competition side to music. That's your prerogative. But while we like to think of music as some sort of spiritual mystical thing , which it is. Other less mystical ideals have influence on artists like competition and rivalries.

When a band like U2 release anything it will be always compared to former albums. Go on to any U2 forums and you will see pages upon pages of U2 fans from Austin Texas to California to Budapest to Perth Australia ranking this album and comparing this album to past works. Every great artist with back catalogues , when they release new albums. Their current work is compared to past work. It ain't a crime to compare and contrast. It's fun actually.

Back to competition. One of the things that drives bands on since the beginning of time is competition. Not a cool thing to say. But it's true. Everytine U2 release an album Bono says its their best. They want to make an album better then Achtung Baby . U2 are in competition with themselves. To make another great album.

Look at the greatest band ever The Beatles. Yes they had great talent, great charisma, great manager and where at the right time and right place. But at the heart of the Beatles sucess was the rivalry between McCartney and Lennon. That ugliest of human emotions jealousy, drove the beatles on. Lennon would write a great song. This would spur Mcartney to write a greater song. Lennon would then try and better Mcartney with another song. And Mcartney would then try and better lennons effort. This rivalry, this competition led to the two of them creating rocks/ pops finest songbook. And in the end drove them apart.

At the start they were best friends . But by the end they hated each others guts. Just watch the the doc Imagine. Where lennon is recording How do you Sleep a song directed at Mcartney . Lennon sings How do you Sleep ye c@@##t while Harrison plays guitar. It's obvious who he is talking about. Even at the end of 70s when lennon came back to music. It wasn't because of some sort of creative reason. Other then as he said himself he heard the latest Mcartney song and he thought **** that's good I better getting writing again.

(That's rivalry drove them on. And led to the break up of their relationships. Behind the music the amount of court cases between band members was unreal. And even after lennons death it got worse if anything. And the reason they got together in the mid 90s was not for music reasons and try and write a song together out of lennons tape recording of free as a bird. It was because of the money. It's very sad to hear how court cases and money and rivalries drove the Beatles apart. But overall Mcartney / Lennon rivalry drove them on to huge sucess. )

It wasn't just the Beatles and competition with themselves. They had rivalries with other groups. Brian Wilson heard Revolver and his response was Pet Sounds. When Mcartney heard Pet Sounds this drove him to make Sergeant Pepper. When Wilson heard Segerat Pepper he was blown away. He tried to make a follow but ended up having a nervous breakdown which he never really recovered from. (Along of course with taking to much LSD.)

Of course the Stones and Beatles were in competition. Their was no love lost there. When The Beatles wrote Segerat Pepper The Stones wrote Their Satanic Majesties Request in complete response. When Jagger first heard Hey Jude as he was driving along in his car for the first time. When the song ended, instead of marvelling at 8 and half minutes of pop perfection, he said "how the f#$$#k are we going to better that". So the Stones went into the studio to attempt to their Hey Jude and their response to the Beatles song was a song called You cannot always get What you Want.

The 70s was a golden age for rock and pop music. And yet it was a very competitive time in music . I heard Don McLean just recently saying how competitive musicians where in thr early 70s. Think of the California scene in the 70s ,the singer songwriter scene . What drove that scene was great talent. But the two other factors in the background was cocaine and competition. Yes the sweet sounds of James Taylor and co.

Every band that begins wants to write great songs and great albums. But also they want to be the best band in their town , the best band in their region then the best band in their country and so on.
So music yes is a feeling. But competition comparisons and rivalries are all in the background playing a role. But in the end you can take whatever you want from a song or an album or any sort of music, that's the beauty of it. There should be no restrictions.

Sonny678

Also I have to say I'm digging Summer of Love. It's like Staring at the Sun and Wild Honeys distant cousin. It has that beatlesesque Harrison here comes the sun vide going on. It's a real summer song. It's chilled relaxed and fun the three things all summer songs should be. I'm digging that song.
Also digging Red Flag Day. It's sounds like U2 War 1983 meets U2 2017. It's a good tune.

MisterAnarchy

Sonny678 wrote: »

They have left many great tracks like Book before of their albums. Like The Beatles ( Rain ) The Jam ( liza Radley ) and Oasis ( Master plan, Rockin Chair) U2 are one of those bands that produce great B sides. The Smiths are another band who produced great B sides eg Asleep, Rubber Ring. Other great U2 B sides eg Luminous Tree and Lady with the Spinning head . Both should have been on albums. But that what's make them a great band. Another band would have released Asleep as a single. The Smiths put it on a b side.

Holy Joe is another gem of a B Side ,should have been on POP .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozBRwfq4BU0

Sonny678

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

Holy Joe is another gem of a B Side ,should have been on POP .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozBRwfq4BU0

Great U2 b sides
Luminous Times
Holy Joe
Walk to the Water
Spanish Eyes
Love comes Tumbling Down
Party Girl
Hallelujah Here she comes
A Room at the Heartbreak Hotel
Silver and Gold
Sweetest Thing
Salome
Lady with the Spinning Head
Blow your House Down
Summer Rain
North and South of the River

While tracks like Celebration and 11 O clock tick tock , both not b sides but top notch tunes all the same.

Wooderson

FFS.

MisterAnarchy

Times are tough it seems so Bono and the Edge are back to busking,this time on the Berlin underground.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ji_83A85og

Seve OB

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

Times are tough it seems so Bono and the Edge are back to busking,this time on the Berlin underground.

and still people have not learned how to capture videos correctly on their mobile phones

Wooderson

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

Times are tough it seems so Bono and the Edge are back to busking,this time on the Berlin underground.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ji_83A85og

Thats still the best shopping trolley used in a performance ever EVER i mean i know that there was one in the video for Common People but really and truly the uniqueness with which U2 brought it to the forefront renders the tawdry attempt by Pulp in 1997 redundant. Only thing that Im missing is more Edge. In the trolley. Yes. Actually in the trolley. That might be the very best thing U2 have ever done since taking the piss out of Phil Collins.

Wooderson

And I love Phil. Especially the Brother Bear s/t. That was his best since the Tarzan which was his last and at that point in time had been by a MILE the very best OST in the history of recorded music. The b-sides to the Tarzan OST were better than Star Wars too.