New U2 Album Next Month with No Fanfare

Hey, remember back in the day when that surprise Molly Hatchet LP appeared on everyone's doorstep with the morning newspaper? And some folks loved it and some thought it wasn't as good as other MH efforts and others said who the elf is Molly and why does she sound like some dude? And everyone reacted according to their inclinations but didn't call a neighborhood meeting, where pitchforks, passionate historians, and hopeful apologists appeared equally?

I thought that Molly album seemed rather bland, personally, despite teasing some fresh ideas.

 

I guess none of the Gorts likes U2 and wants to manage this thread.... They let it run well over the standard 1000 posts!

 

Why should the Gorts be any different? They're human too.

 

I agree, and it's not something you can say about a lot of U2 albums. Most of the time they have a great next-to-last song and then just kind of fade out the album with an ok track.

I'm really liking this new record. Definitely the best since ATYCLB, just have to see how it holds up over time. It must be pretty good if I can jump into a U2 thread, on this forum, and not just see an endless series of I-hate-U2 posts.

Anyway, great album, can't wait for the vinyl release.

 

I never chimed in with my opinion of the album itself, for whatever that's worth. I usually avoid expressing opinions of new U2 albums based solely on first impressions, as they usually take a handful of listens to fully appreciate. After giving this new one several spins, I can say that I am REALLY liking it. Some of the songs I “got” right away, like “The Miracle” and “The Troubles.” Other songs took a little longer, and each time I listen, a different one suddenly clicks with me. On one listen, it’ll be “Iris” or “Sleep Like A Baby”; on another listen, “Raised By Wolves,” “California,” “Cedarwood Road” and “Song For Someone.” I’m still struggling to connect to a few songs, but overall I think the album rewards repeat listens. Now, excuse me while I go play it again...

P.S. I think "The Miracle" will be a monster way to kick off a live show.

 

Yes, after multiple listens, it has really clicked for me as well. I'm increasingly reluctant to tamper with an artist's vision for their album, but I made a playlist that swapped "Invisible" in place of "The Miracle" as the leadoff track, and, with that one little tweak, I like every single song. "Every Breaking Wave" and "The Troubles" are the two songs that really stand out to me as up there with their best work, but the whole album is growing on me.

 

Absolutely. I think U2 made a mistake of releasing Invisible as a single. They should have saved it for the album as it works much better in that context. Volcano would have been a perfect choice of first single. The first song people hear from U2 in 5 years should be undeniably catchy on first listen, and Volcano fits the bill IMO. Unlike The Miracle which I must have listened to 10 times now and I still can't remember it.

 

I would have chosen "Every Breaking Wave" or "Song For Someone" as the first single. To be honest, however, I don't think it really matters which song they chose as the single, because I doubt Top 40 radio would play any song from this album. The promotional strategy they did choose is a better way to promote the album than trying to compete with Charlie XCX, Taylor Swift, Iggy Azalea, etc. on Top 40 radio right now.

 

I think of "The Miracle" as a better articulation of the "Meet Me in the Sound" lyrical idea from "Get On Your Boots-- as in, "We hope to do for some young band what the Ramones did for us."

 

Yes, it's not so much that I don't like "The Miracle" as it is that I really like "Invisible" and think "Invisible" needs to be on the album.

 

So, How did it taste ?

 

Agreed. But maybe not at the expense of another song. Why not 12 tracks? Put Invisible at the start of side 2, ahead of Volcano.

 

How many sides is the vinyl. Current album is 48 minutes.

 

Come to think of it, I believe it's a double. So, Invisible at the start of side 3, disc 2?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Songs_of_Innocence_(album)
Vinyl has 12 tracks. Pretty sure it's a double like Horizon, Pop, Rattle and the Joshua reissue.

 

Embarrassing. See post # 809 ...
New U2 Album Next Month with No Fanfare

 

How is that different than Eno/Lanois/various other producers & programmers de jour/Flood/Lillywhite coming in and out of the U2 recording studio?

Comparing 3-5 individuals making albums with the same 3-5 individuals 30+ years later is the best comparison.

 

The funny thing about the timing of this release is that I meant to spend the week listening to the Beatles mono LP box, for which I paid 300 bucks. That plan was completely derailed by the U2 album, which I got for free.

 

I like the digital booklet, its looks typewritten!!

Bferr1- I hope you've read the lyrics- you'll be surprised U2 is not absolute (blinded). It sparse in their later albums but very prevalent in their earlier works.

 

Free on itunes right now. Thanks U2, hope it's good.

 

Actually, the "Post" critic trashed the method of delivery - he says next to nothing about the music itself but rails against the way it got to people:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ple-and-rock-and-roll-as-dystopian-junk-mail/

The actual review of the album is fairly positive:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/enter...700cfa-391a-11e4-9c9f-ebb47272e40e_story.html

 

And Geico can save you up to 15 percent on car insurance.

 

I've seen very mixed reviews. Allmusic has kept quiet so far, but I predict they'll give the 4-star rubber stamp for the iconic artist / 5 stars by Rolling Stone / ambivalent reviews elsewhere scenario

 

Other than the one I linked, I've not read any of the reviews. I just posted to contest the previous claim that the WaPo panned the album. The first "review" really was just a complaint about the album being "forced" on consumers - it had next to nothing to do with the music itself...