footyfan10

thats what i said...:confused:

I really hate how every magazine acts like Coldplay have essentially tried to rip off U2 or taken their style. I'm a huge U2 and Coldplay fan, and just because I understand their nuances doesn't mean I've acted like their are larger distinctions than there are. The only comparison should be success and even that is becoming irrelavent because the music business is changing so rapidly. U2 and Coldplay aren't binaries, and I can't illustrate their differences as such. But I can say that to me, U2 is passion and Coldplay is sweet. These to me are shown mainly through Bono and Chris Martin. Their personalities dictate the type of music they play. U2 is a fire and Coldplay is a warm blanket. I think if there was one phrase that could encapsulate the emotional difference you procure from listening to each bands music, this would be it.

I think in terms of sheer success and critical...well controversy, Coldplay have been the best. The fact that people make fun of Coldplay shows that they're worth talking about. There's plenty of other bands and musicians that write music that, to some, would be called wimpy or "gay". But they don't talk about those people, they talk about Coldplay. That's for a reason. I think what people tend to do is look at when a band is at it's best. Some indicators may be how well they sell, but I think it's mainly just the popular band that once we've seen the decade the critics love. Coldplay has gotten the shaft, but I think history will look back on this decade quite differently. U2 and Radiohead, arguably the bands that dominated the past two decades (U2 80s and Radiohead 90s), did extremely well in the 2000s, but they were established acts. Bands always seem to get remembered for their earliest stuff. Coldplay won't be different than that. The 2000s will be remembered as theres. The Killers came late to the show and haven't had the same success - Brandon Flowers really just talks a good game (what have they really done after Hot Fuss...I like songs on their past two albums...but the albums are no where near Hot Fuss). Is there a single band you can think of in the 2000s who have enjoyed the success of Coldplay not named Radiohead and U2. I don't think anyone can.

I think it's pretty funny how on most U2 albums you can tell exactly what's going to be a single and what's not. It's not like Radiohead or Coldplay where it's very hard to guess. This in someway speaks to Radiohead not having songs that are generally radio-friendly and Coldplay having many. I see it though, that U2 is always thinking about the radio. I may like Magnificent, I'll Go Crazy... and Breathe, but it seems all too clear that they will be the singles after Get On Your Boots. I'd say the only one I'm not sure about is Moment of Surrender, but I think that's only because I don't think the tune has great radio value - the lyrics have TREMENDOUS VALUE. There are some songs that drive me mad on this album because they seem like with one tweak or another they could be great. Unknown Caller is the one that gets me the most. I hate the robotic voice shit. I don't usually swear, but it is absolute shit in my opinion. They completely ruin the song. I understand why it's there. But that has no place in any song. It's sounds ridiculous. One review said contrived...I couldn't agree more. I'm expressing this so harshly because it really bothers me that it fucks up the song. I love everything else so much. One part just ruins it for me. The bird in the beginning and the organ are just beautiful. Anyways yeah. I had to get some of that out. I've been wearing this out. I'll probably need a break once my iTunes pre-order is finally available. Hopefully neither of the bonus tracks are the No Line On the Horizon b-side. I didn't like it. Hopefully they're new!

I'm not sure exactly where you're getting that. I'm not surprised that some people will feel this way. It's not a pop mainstream album. U2 wanted to go somewhere they haven't before and I like Achtung Baby or other efforts that have turned the direction, some people aren't going to follow along. U2 should not retire. If anything this album confirms their devotion to doing musically interesting things. Things that will stimulate themselves, even at the expense of more mainstream fans.

Review if you want to call it that. The Edge said in Q Magazine that he wanted this to be like the albums he loved. The one you could listen to again and again and always find nuances. You could grow with the album. You could take a lot from it over a long period of time. On the outset this seems that very album. It's going to take patience and it's going to take a lot of time. I'm really happy I got started. The thing is, we're all at a Coldplay forum so I'll assume we're all Coldplay fans. Viva la Vida was the most exceptional album. I thought it had a lot of color and flavor. I think it was a great move forward for Coldplay. I listened to some of those songs again and again. I still do. But the thing about Coldplay, the thing about most music, is that after a while it's just the song. The deconstruction period ends. You know the lyrics. You have your take. You like the sound or you don't. Maybe a song that didn't grab you at first now has or maybe a song you loved has drifted into oblivion. That's what happens to me with most albums. Even a lot of U2's. But I know this album isn't just going to end up being background noise and melody for me while I do homework. It demands to be listened to. It's going to take a LONG time to digest. This album is full of paradoxs. It's not a singles album, but it will probably have at least two big singles. This is not a mainstream album but I assume it's sales will only be affected by the music industries climate and not by U2's own music. This album is loud and it's quiet. It's generic and it's experimental. There are a hundred and one binaries. This being said...I'm not sure what my take is. While I'm into some mainstream music, a lot of my palette exists a little off of mainstream. I cannot listen to The Fray over and over again, but I can listen to them a little. I can listen to Coldplay a lot because I find their music exists in that a little off to the left of mainstream. When they go all out mainstream, in songs like Lost! and Lovers in Japan, I tend to cringe a little after my initial enjoyment of a song. I guess I'm just trying to set up my take. To make sure everyone understands I would only be a little annoyed if this album had no really radio worthy songs. The thing is I think it does. I think this is a type of album that will move U2 fans. The thing about U2 is that they change. The change a lot. Yes there's always Bono, The Edge, Adam and Larry, but they have evolved beautifully and turned their sound upside down before. This album doesn't go that far. If you want to know what I thought song by song on first listen I will say, but I doubt it will hold for long. No Line on the Horizon was not what I was looking for. I sort of found this song boring to be honest. Magnificient, which seemed such an apparent U2 song, is not working for me. There are parts where I'm moved, but only just. This might grow on me, although I think for most it will be one of the more apparent hit songs. Moment of Surrender might be the most profound track I've heard U2 do in a while. When U2 is at their best for me, is usually when Bono is at his best. It's about so much more than the music. It's about the soul. This track has soul. I'm not sure how to say it any better than that. It is beautiful and profound. Unknown Caller is one of those tricky songs that anyone with any knowledge of Bono and U2 should figure out is about God. I like it a lot for the most part. I don't like how they tried to do a robotic voice - I thought that was poorly thought out. I liked the organ coming in though, it just validated my thought it was about God (I say this because of church organs). Oh and I love the bird sound. I'll Go Crazy If I Don't Go Crazy Tonight is an unabashed pop song. I love it though. It's going to be on their decade album. All the reviews said it'd be happy and it is. It's a feel good song. The mood I achieved while listening to it was sort of like what Strawberry Swing did to me except to a lesser extent - which does not mean I think the songs worse. Get On Your Boots...is their really something for me to say. Everyone has pretty much come to their opinions. I just know mine has evolved since my initial disgust. There's some satisfaction I draw from this tune. Stand Up Comedy...hmm. I wish they just did Stand Up. Some review was complaining about song names. I concur. The comedy should have been dropped. I didn't feel it really, but there's some wacked out part near the end. Very quick though. I think you'll know what I'm talking about. I liked that. Fez - Being Born was as weird as I expected. There are a few moments on this album where it did really stop being a U2 album. The beginning of this song is one of those moments. If I thought U2 had Eno's usual style in them full blown I would say that they could come up with something like this, but I feel it's them just letting Eno do more than he should. I like the guy. I like his music even, but I don't like it taking over a record. I like the atmospheres when they compliment U2's style, but not for the sake of atmospheres. White as Snow is a song I think will grow on me. I like how its constructed. I like what it says. It's just one of those songs thats going to take a while to get into. Breathe I liked. How much I liked it I'm not sure. It has brilliant parts. I like the idea of grace through sound. I like the idea of this song. I like that it's not blowing me away yet. Cedars of Lebanon is stripped down. This song seems to exist to let Bono do what he wants. You almost forget there's music. You just hear the character Bono has created for you (has anyone thought about how these characters might end up in the concerts? I think that'd be pretty damn cool). It's a solemn way to end an album. It's not uplifting like Yahweh. I sort of wish it was. I'm sorry this was so damn long. I just devoted a lot of time to listening and paying attention, so I had a lot of thoughts. Regardless I think we are all going to hear a lot of fringe U2 fans taking the piss out of this album. The fans who could only get into albums like The Joshua Tree, All That You Can't Leave Behind and How to Distmantle an Atomic Bomb. Basically the singles fans. But if you're into music at all I can't see how you could dislike this album or what U2 are trying to achieve. They aren't sitting on their laurels everyone, and that's quite a thing for four men about to hit 50.

NOOOOOOOO. I have class right now so I can't listen. It's a lecture and my prof can barely see me, but I'm not sure I have the balls to pull out the headphones. Damn it. I want to listen to it so badly!!! Oh and the idea that I would wait for the release date like some will is just preposterous. I used to be that person, and if U2's album came out in November when it was supposed to and leaked in October I am sure that I would have had the strength to not listen (maybe not :\), but I've had to wait so much longer. I got all the files onto my iTunes and heard about three seconds of each opening. The differences are SOOOOOOO profound. I'm really excited. AH...got to go! Oh and I've already got the album on pre-order on iTunes...in case anyone thinks I would cheat U2 out of what they deserve.

I know. Which leads me to think this could be the biggest mess or the most beautiful masterpiece. It's really hard to tell.

I was not involved in any pre-buzz for any other U2 album because I was a U2 fan before HTDAAB but I was not a "current" U2 fan, meaning I had no large scale knowledge of the band. Now that I'm fully entrenched in U2, I'm not quite sure to make of all the reviews and buzz around this album. Some people are saying its like Zoorapa and others are saying its like The Unforgettable Fire. Some say its a huge departure from the last two albums and others say its pretty consistently U2 (which doesn't seem to make much sense unless you consider "how" U2 plays music as opposed to what music they play - which is largely varied). I guess I'm fairly nervous. I listened to the album clips and only found a few remotely impressive. I guess this album is going to be a grower. I guess thats what I want to an extent. It's just I always think the best albums are the ones that grow for a little while and then you can get into them. That doesnt mean once the music finished growing that it becomes less interesting or nuanced, its just I don't want to force myself to listen music I think I dislike. This is just fears though, I don't know if any will materialise.

i have to say that i did not like no line on the horizon at all. i know its just the alternative version, but i thought it was pretty bad and boring. i hope the album version is better. i also hope this album doesnt massively disappoint me.

lets not forget "the sweetest thing" making a comeback on the 1980s CD. maybe mercy will make it when U2 release their 2000s CD and make it as a single too. its a great song. this next album better be good so there are enough songs for u2 to make some buck off the compilations.

i dont like how a lot of the songs seem like bono is just talking and not singing.

i cant say i like the music video, but it did give me some insight into wtf bono is talking about. this is always good because bono is a tricky man. you cant trust short men with big ideas. its nice to know what he's talking about.

They sort of did. There is a show in Mansfield, Massachussets of all places. I'm like 3 hours from there according to google maps. This is potentially cool but not too cool because I honestly don't know if I'm gonna be able to get there. I've never seen Coldplay play, but I would love if this could happen.

basically i want Coldplay to win but i wouldnt be terribly dissapointed nor suprised if radiohead won. in rainbows is such an amazing album. i guess im just hoping that both win their respective album categories. coldplay with rock and radiohead with alternative. that would make me very pleased. i dont see how each cant win their categories when you consider the fact that they're up for album of the year and their contenders in their specific categories are not (or i think so).

Well if some people are going to post I think I might share my thoughts/hopes. Personally I don't think Eno can do anything TOO crazy with a rock band. Take them out of their element...sure - without a doubt. He's definitely doing that. I just doubt his ability to make a Kid A. Personally I wouldn't want that. I know lots of bands do what Coldplay does. That's mainly because Coldplay jumped in on a genre and in my opinion perfected it. There are so many piano based bands that are doing exactly what Coldplay do. I'm not talking Keane here - I give them credit. They are not ripping anyone off. I really just want Coldplay to remain Coldplay, because they are the best in the world at what they do. U2 and Radiohead are very different styles within similar genres. I'd love Coldplay to do their Achtung Baby or Kid A, but I want it to be Coldplays. I don't just want random experimentation for no purpose. I think Coldplay has evolved beautifully. When you compare them to U2 (not Radiohead who had great albums right after Pablo Honey - sorry Pablo Honey fans), they have had much greater success early on. Success does not dictate talent of course or quality, but when you think about Boy and October...well they are hardly stellar albums. There's like one or two tracks on each album tops that are worth listening to. Coldplay has legendary tracks from their first two albums. Yellow, The Scientist and Clocks are rock/pop classics. I don't mean they don't have other songs, I mean they have classics, not just ok songs. If Coldplay keeps evolving I think they'll be just fine. Maybe they'll take a greater leap with this record, and I'd love that as long as they don't forget the genre they come from. I really don't think they will. They want to make music the world can love.

figured as much. my bad

The Roadie 42 blog talked pretty extensively about the new sessions the band are up to. The Chris-less sessions I should say. I figured, despite the fact there are other threads (I haven't seen any but I'm sure they're there), we could use this as a place to generally discuss what the band is up to. Are these sessions going to form the supposed 2009 album? Are they going to be nearly as experimental when we get the final product? Do we want more experimenting? Do we want more of Viva la Vida or back to the basics (although I DOUBT the latter completely...also dont want it myself)? What direction would you like them to head? Could they experiment in the U2 sense or Radiohead? I am just so excited by all of this and I figured this could be a good place to talk about the potential for a new album.

unfortunately i dont see this making u.s. itunes. british bands never tend to release ep's in the u.s. I'm not sure if it's because they expect Europeans to be more acceptent of them. I wish they would give them across the pond. I'd like LIT live and I'd like the legit version of the goldrush. I doubt we'll get it though.

Much like the other song will sings (wow im so sorry i dont know the exact name i just know death will conquer...maybe that is the name), i dont like this one. It's not because of will, although it is odd hearing his voice, it's because the style of song is just so...different. It's not like Coldplay, it's not like anything I would listen to. It's like campy southern. By campy I mean goofy and not too serious. I've only heard it a few times, maybe it will grow but I doubt it. The distortion is also very weird.

"'Get On Your Boots' is a great opening salvo from what is a brilliant album," Hot Press editor Niall Stokes commented. "No Line On The Horizon is a huge record, full of big songs, powerful riffs and superb musicianship. It's more musically diverse that any U2 album since Rattle And Hum, mixing hard rock, psychedelia, pop, electronica, dance, folk, country, spiritual music and orchestral shadings in what is a fantastically heady brew. It will certainly challenge U2 fans, but my guess is that they'll ultimately be inspired. It's going to be a massive record. I can't wait to hear the songs live." from http://www.atu2.com/news/article.src?ID=5206 I really like what he has to say about the record being diverse. That's EXACTLY what I wanted to hear. I couldn't have an all Zoorapa album or an all Joshua Tree album. I am officially massively pumped.

I guess when I say Joshua Tree I mean songs that aren't just experimental...I don't know if that fully encompasses my thoughts. For the longest time I just didn't like Achtung Baby. I've been listening to it ALL THE TIME lately. It's an awesome album and I'm very annoyed that One was the only song I really explored. I guess the way I see it, I don't need U2 to make songs that will get great radio play. I mean besides some of their greatest hits, I usually find better fare outside of what they release as singles. I love experimentation, I just don't want that to lead to a bad album. Sometimes experimenting just doesn't work out. If they hit it out of the park like everyone seems to be saying they are, well than thats awesome. I really think U2 won't let me down.

I don't agree. Fans do not have to buy all these things. It's only a rip-off when the only available way to get the album is $20 or more. U2 is packaging a lot of stuff together for some of these formats, so it's some bang for your buck if you want it. I personally want a U2 poster and always like to read as much literature as I can about them. If I had to buy the $100 package to get this album I'd be pissed. But I don't have to. I can if I want. I don't like how people act like fans are getting ripped off. It's the fans choice. Like when U218 came out. Fans didn't have to buy this at all. They should not get angry about a compilation album coming out if they do not have to buy it. I'm a fan of tons of bands but I don't get material of theirs again if I already own it.

I'm hoping U2's album basically doesn't go crazy. That it has some songs like Get on Your Boots and some stuff more like the Joshua Tree days. I guess I don't even mind GOYB. It's that I mind a lack of seriousness. I can listen to pop-happy songs from anyone. They tend to be songs I'm into for a few weeks and then occasionally come back to to remember old times. Well I don't want this to be one of those songs, and I don't want U2 to be one of those bands/artists. I mean come on..."sexy boots". It's definitely funny. And I enjoy the song quite a lot. And I do know you can have a U2 album (or rather a Bono album) without a lot of seriousness (cause Bono is mad serious). I just hope musically they aren't going after Zoorapa and Pop. Achtung Baby is great, but it's not my favorite U2 style. I think if U2 do what Coldplay sort of did on Viva la Vida I'd be very happy. I know Coldplay didn't experiment nearly as much, but there were sounds I didn't expect. I know U2 will experiment a lot more, but I just don't want the whole thing to be like GOYB. I don't think it will though - I hope not at least.

keane keane keane