SOS
Active topics
U2 - Songs Of Surrender (2023)
 Tracks: 40


  1. How is this re-imagined?

    After initially liking the Pride take , honestly the rest i have heard would send a sloth to sleep for eternity.

    This is just becoming embarrassing im afraid.

    To have these songs released as anything other than B Sides (at best) im sorry to say is 100% a cash grab!!

    It is a joke.

    I don't even blame Bono for this , my crosshairs are firmly pointed at The Edge. All this 'polished pop' we have endured over this past decade i believe has come from Edges narrative!
  2. Originally posted by EdgeMedia72:[..]


    How is this re-imagined?

    After initially liking the Pride take , honestly the rest i have heard would send a sloth to sleep for eternity.

    This is just becoming embarrassing im afraid.

    To have these songs released as anything other than B Sides (at best) im sorry to say is 100% a cash grab!!

    It is a joke.

    I don't even blame Bono for this , my crosshairs are firmly pointed at The Edge. All this 'polished pop' we have endured over this past decade i believe has come from Edges narrative!
    What is Edge's narrative? I'm still wondering how a collection of 40 re-recorded songs, acoustic and stripped down, constitutes a cash grab when there realistically won't be a huge demand for it? We haven't heard the entire songs yet, and the clips are from the book, no? If the last decade of music is from anyone, I'd say it's from Bono.
  3. This may be another way of selling people the same songs again, but hardly anybody outside of the fan base will buy this. I’ll probably just stream it off Apple Music and not even buy a physical copy. I care so little about this release it’s not funny. I consider it a waste of time, when they could be getting us new music.
  4. I think it’s absolutely hilarious to hear anyone describe this album as a cash grab, because it’s not built to sell. If you didn’t have the same outlook every damn time the Joshua tree, and Achtung Baby were re-issued, and when the band released three greatest hits albums, I don’t want to hear a word about how surrender is lazy.
  5. We haven't even heard the album...
  6. There’s been a lot of talk about this next album. Maybe, maybe too much talk. This album is not a rebel album. This album is Songs of Surrender.
  7. Originally posted by EdgeMedia72:[..]


    How is this re-imagined?

    After initially liking the Pride take , honestly the rest i have heard would send a sloth to sleep for eternity.

    This is just becoming embarrassing im afraid.

    To have these songs released as anything other than B Sides (at best) im sorry to say is 100% a cash grab!!

    It is a joke.

    I don't even blame Bono for this , my crosshairs are firmly pointed at The Edge. All this 'polished pop' we have endured over this past decade i believe has come from Edges narrative!
    A cash grab!!! Of course. If you look up the sales of every artist from around U2's age, you will see that the best selling album of their entire career is the re-working of songs album. Sting's "My Songs" sold 34 million copies far outdistancing The Police's Synchronicity. Michael Jackson's last album, "Thriller Again" outsold the original Thriller by selling 99 million copies. Bon Jovi's "This Left Feels Right" sold 48 million copies, far outselling Slippery When Wet. Universal did backfilps and immediately shut down the company finding out U2 decided to follow this trend of re-imagining albums. They would not have to do anything, since this Cash Grab would make everyone rich!!!!

    Huh? I'm wrong? Never! Actually, the re-working albums are the LOWEST selling albums of nearly EVERY SINGLE ARTIST who has done one. Hardly a cash grab. As I pointed out earlier in this thread, All five or so of Sting's symphony albums, re-working albums sales combined did not equal the sales of Mercury Falling, which was considered a sales failure. And TONS of people on this site are calling this pre-determined failure a "Cash Grab." I can't believe what I'm reading. If Van Morrison decided to do an Auto Tune album, would that be a cash grab too? If a under 30 artist decided to do an album without Auto Tune....well, some of you get my point. This is not a cash grab, and U2 don't even believe it is. But it will likely sell a lot less than they think it will. I'm still holding out the faintest of hope that it will be passable. Pride and WOWY are not exactly breaking streaming records now, are they?
  8. Originally posted by pleasegone:[..]
    A cash grab!!! Of course. If you look up the sales of every artist from around U2's age, you will see that the best selling album of their entire career is the re-working of songs album. Sting's "My Songs" sold 34 million copies far outdistancing The Police's Synchronicity. Michael Jackson's last album, "Thriller Again" outsold the original Thriller by selling 99 million copies. Bon Jovi's "This Left Feels Right" sold 48 million copies, far outselling Slippery When Wet. Universal did backfilps and immediately shut down the company finding out U2 decided to follow this trend of re-imagining albums. They would not have to do anything, since this Cash Grab would make everyone rich!!!!

    Huh? I'm wrong? Never! Actually, the re-working albums are the LOWEST selling albums of nearly EVERY SINGLE ARTIST who has done one. Hardly a cash grab. As I pointed out earlier in this thread, All five or so of Sting's symphony albums, re-working albums sales combined did not equal the sales of Mercury Falling, which was considered a sales failure. And TONS of people on this site are calling this pre-determined failure a "Cash Grab." I can't believe what I'm reading. If Van Morrison decided to do an Auto Tune album, would that be a cash grab too? If a under 30 artist decided to do an album without Auto Tune....well, some of you get my point. This is not a cash grab, and U2 don't even believe it is. But it will likely sell a lot less than they think it will. I'm still holding out the faintest of hope that it will be passable. Pride and WOWY are not exactly breaking streaming records now, are they?
    100% agree! There isn't even big money in new music, especially if it isn't that good/popular
  9. This forum

  10. Originally posted by pleasegone:[..]
    A cash grab!!! Of course. If you look up the sales of every artist from around U2's age, you will see that the best selling album of their entire career is the re-working of songs album. Sting's "My Songs" sold 34 million copies far outdistancing The Police's Synchronicity. Michael Jackson's last album, "Thriller Again" outsold the original Thriller by selling 99 million copies. Bon Jovi's "This Left Feels Right" sold 48 million copies, far outselling Slippery When Wet. Universal did backfilps and immediately shut down the company finding out U2 decided to follow this trend of re-imagining albums. They would not have to do anything, since this Cash Grab would make everyone rich!!!!

    Huh? I'm wrong? Never! Actually, the re-working albums are the LOWEST selling albums of nearly EVERY SINGLE ARTIST who has done one. Hardly a cash grab. As I pointed out earlier in this thread, All five or so of Sting's symphony albums, re-working albums sales combined did not equal the sales of Mercury Falling, which was considered a sales failure. And TONS of people on this site are calling this pre-determined failure a "Cash Grab." I can't believe what I'm reading. If Van Morrison decided to do an Auto Tune album, would that be a cash grab too? If a under 30 artist decided to do an album without Auto Tune....well, some of you get my point. This is not a cash grab, and U2 don't even believe it is. But it will likely sell a lot less than they think it will. I'm still holding out the faintest of hope that it will be passable. Pride and WOWY are not exactly breaking streaming records now, are they?
    This
  12. it's pretty awful.

    Is the Purple vinyl out yet ?