GEN
Active topics
  2. Originally posted by daymo1202:[..]I was there at that, living in New York at the time "Holy Joe" sounded great. I got the heads up the previous weekend that the band were going to be there to launch the POP album. We waited outside that morning the first 100 or so were ushered in.
    H O L Y J O E ...!!! You were there
    How awesome
  3. Originally posted by RattleandHum1988:[..]
    I guess that's what I was saying, was that at least (to me) Pop was strong enough in a certain direction to make them course-correct that much. I don't think NLOTH had anywhere near the same degree of an effect on them, only because it wasn't THAT different from what they done before, and now, they don't really know what or who they are musically - at least from a listening point of view. I also think Pop is much better written album. Imagine all the songs on Pop with just a piano and the lyrics, and then the same with NLOTH. I think one is clearly better.

    I think I just disagree with many on here about NLOTH, especially when it comes to songs like Magnificent and Moment of Surrender. Magnificent to me is a lame attempt at another Beautiful Day (much the same way Boots is a lame attempt at another Vertigo), and I think if it was as good they'd be playing at these shows alongside BD, Vertigo, and Elevation. Moment of Surrender just never had the profound effect on me that it's seemingly had on many others.

    To the beginning of your post, to me it just comes down to opinion. Sure you could boil it down to both albums just being rejected and that's it, but I think there's a lot more to it than that. I think Pop was rejected to a much further degree, because the album experimented to a much further degree.

    EDIT: It also took a lot less time for them to stop playing NLOTH songs on 360 compared to them doing the same on Popmart. I think with Popmart they were confident and knew they were being risky with their work, whereas with NLOTH, I remember interviews not long after 360 started where they were already saying they thought NLOTH failed as an experiment. Wouldn't be able to cite those though.
    It's all open to interpretation. Pop sold twice as many copies as NLOTH, so was it really rejected to a much further degree? (and I do realize that the climate for record sales was much better in 96)

    Like I said, we can marginalize, theorize, analyze all we want. It all comes down to our opinions. I love them both. And I think they have common ground in that both were a departure from the U2 norm (although, with Pop they began that direction with AB, then Zooropa) Anyway, back to the point... Pop's "failure" sort of stopped them in their tracks and derailed them... sent them back in a more cautious and generic direction, as is evident on the next releases, ATYCLB and HTDAAB. I think with NLOTH, they were ready to try to let loose again and throw caution to the wind. And then (as with Pop) the response stopped them in their tracks on something (I feel, same as Pop) they were genuinely proud of at the time. This is how I compare the two together. ANd I would say they fear songs from NLOTH more than they do songs from Pop (if even for your reasons, that the songwriting is stronger on Pop)

    And while we're throwing our opinions around, I love Beautiful Day, and I love Magnificent and I would never compared one with the other... Now you're forcing me to go play each back to back!
  4. Originally posted by BigGiRL:[..]
    I was not the one comparing U2 to The Rolling Stones. If I said anything between the lines it was that the Stones still enjoy what they do and I hope U2 will have fun in what they do, whatever they do. That's just my sincere hope.

    And, yes, I'll admit my musical taste is not very adventurous and I don't think it will become any wider than it is now. I can spend the rest of my life listning to what I already know. I love SOI and I love Blue & Lonesome. Both records made me very happy.

    And when Pop came out, I loved it. Especially side 1 (see, that's just my oldskool condition!), and I still listen to it every now and then (or watch the Mexico 97 dvd ), but when ATYCLB came out, it was a breath of fresh air to me (or actually even a month before it came out since I had a in-house copy on my desk at my PolyGram office )

    But for me, the best U2 albums have been made before 1992. I sure don't mind some more official 80-ies live releases. Or a 2023 "40th anniversary War" tour with Elevation and Beautiful Day to top it off


    PolyGram? You were a label grunt, too?

    I'm with you. (on all of the above) And I have no problems at all with "safe" U2 either...
  5. Yes, I was there, heard it on the Irish grapevine when I was living in New York. I didn't believe it at first but a friend of mine insisted it was true so we all headed over that cold February morning and waited outside.

    "Holy Joe" sounded off the scale, some serious echo and incredibly raw. I've looked at the footage countless times but the camera pans away from the area where we were. They did a press conference and then it was all over and back to the daily grind of the "Big Apple". I was honestly more surprised to see The Edge minus his usual hat. lol
  6. Originally posted by blueeyedboy:[..]


    PolyGram? You were a label grunt, too?

    I'm with you. (on all of the above) And I have no problems at all with "safe" U2 either...
    Just a simple 9-5 purchase assistant...
  7. Originally posted by daymo1202:

    I saw POP in Philadelphia in June 1997. To be totally honest I thought it sucked. I'm in a minority I guess, but for me it was lifeless. Hard not to compare it to previous tours such as ZooTV, Lovetown and the 1987 JT Tour.



    I thought the Popmart show I was at sucked too at the time.

    Wish I could see it now with the different perspective that I have towards the whole project.
  8. Pop will go down in history as one of U2's best albums . Seminal
  9. I think in general u2's top 3 albums will always be considered Joshua Tree, Achtung Baby and All that You can't leave behind, in that order. (Personally my top 3 also but not in that order). The reason why is because of the commercial success of these albums and the singles they've had from them. War has outsold ATYCLB but I believe that is an exception and if you asked 100 people most would pick they 3. I'm not saying that makes them the best but that's how I feel the general public would see it.
  10. Originally posted by deanallison:[..]
    I think in general u2's top 3 albums will always be considered Joshua Tree, Achtung Baby and All that You can't leave behind, in that order. (Personally my top 3 also but not in that order). The reason why is because of the commercial success of these albums and the singles they've had from them. War has outsold ATYCLB but I believe that is an exception and if you asked 100 people most would pick they 3. I'm not saying that makes them the best but that's how I feel the general public would see it.
    General public being the key word. The general public would say Best of 1980-1990, Best of 1990-2000 and U218.

    And interestingly enough, we keep mentioning how experimental Pop, when it was AB that actually led them there...

  11. Originally posted by blueeyedboy:[..]
    General public being the key word. The general public would say Best of 1980-1990, Best of 1990-2000 and U218.

    And interestingly enough, we keep mentioning how experimental Pop, when it was AB that actually led them there...

    Yeah I dont think we'd get ATYCLB on fan forums as 3rd even though I personally love it. I don't think we'd get pop in the top 5 either though, maybe they should make best u2 album the next poll on here.
  12. I listened to Pop again and I realized how much of it was a product of the time it was released. From the sound to the lyrics, the album definitely feels dated.