U2 | Songs of Innocence

[Heathen]

Yeah because making a couple of posts about the shitty way this album was released is totally about being cool for not liking U2.

You made one of the first five or so posts in this thread. And it wasn't about how the album was released or to complain about it automatically downloading. Before any of those topics came up in here, you were already posting in this thread. So you're gonna need a better excuse for your initial presence.

So do tell, why were you in this thread in the first place? There are hundreds of threads in OB about bands or albums I just don't fucking care about. I've never once felt the need to go into one. I don't understand why anyone would.

Like I said, if you want to actually listen to the album and tell us why you hate it in some vaguely critical fashion, then by all means, feel free to do so. Otherwise, I just don't get the point.

Oh so it's the titles thing that you're pissed off about? I thought the titles sounded fake/funny so I said it. Big fucking deal. Then I read something that led me to believe that the album would be automatically added when you log into your account so I asked it that was true. I was told it wasn't but then I found out it was actually real, so I started posted about that because I think it's a very shitty practice. That's really all there is to it. I'm not sure how a discussion about the way an album is being made available would be out of line in a thread about said album. If that's too negative for you then I hope you never said anything negative about PJ or anything else on this board.

Now why did I click on this thread to begin with? I don't know, why not? It can be curiosity, sometimes there can be something interesting in a thread about a band I don't care about, sometimes there's gonna be something worth reading, or funny, or whatever. Many times I'll click on a thread just so it's marked as read etc. Who fucking cares.

[broken iris]

U2 Gives Away New Album NOW, Skip Charts, And Who Cares? No Money in CD Sales

by Roger Friedman - September 9, 2014 4:44 pm


U2 has released its new album to iTunes subscribers today like right now, to all 500 million of them. Songs of Innocence is the title. Sign up for iTunes– it’s free– and you can get the album free if you order it by October 13th. The album will not qualify for chart positions or RIAA certifications. And U2 is saying basically Who cares?

Album sales have vanished. The most U2 would sell in its first week, if they were very very lucky, would between 300,000 and 500,000 copies. And that’s being extremely optimistic. It’s not worth the price of printing them up. Just give it away, and make the money through publishing, which the group owns, and concert tours. LiveNation will soon announce a world wide tour that should net the group hundreds of millions of dollars.

It’s brilliant, and no different in concept than giving CDs to ticket buyers, which has been tried with Madonna and Prince. LiveNation has U2 under a 360 contract, they can simply build in the price of the album. Universal Music can collect on vinyl, a small amount of physical CDs, and streaming. My guess though is that “Songs of Innocence” will limited to streaming on iTunes Radio and not available on Spotify and other services.

Check mate.

Hats off to Guy Oseary who continues the tradition of taking U2 into brave new waters, started by Paul McGuinness.

Interesting take.

[stip]

You're right. Proper circlejerking requires your full attention.

It does. And a "We hate U2 thread!" would let all of you circlejerk over how fucking cool it makes you to hate U2 in 2014 without the horrible annoyance of dealing with people who have actually listened to the record in question and would like to share their thoughts on it with each other.

Now you know how I feel about pearl jam chat these days

[stip]

Lament, I presume you're on a u2 board as well. What is the general reaction?

[Heathen]

U2 Gives Away New Album NOW, Skip Charts, And Who Cares? No Money in CD Sales

by Roger Friedman - September 9, 2014 4:44 pm


U2 has released its new album to iTunes subscribers today like right now, to all 500 million of them. Songs of Innocence is the title. Sign up for iTunes– it’s free– and you can get the album free if you order it by October 13th. The album will not qualify for chart positions or RIAA certifications. And U2 is saying basically Who cares?

Album sales have vanished. The most U2 would sell in its first week, if they were very very lucky, would between 300,000 and 500,000 copies. And that’s being extremely optimistic. It’s not worth the price of printing them up. Just give it away, and make the money through publishing, which the group owns, and concert tours. LiveNation will soon announce a world wide tour that should net the group hundreds of millions of dollars.

It’s brilliant, and no different in concept than giving CDs to ticket buyers, which has been tried with Madonna and Prince. LiveNation has U2 under a 360 contract, they can simply build in the price of the album. Universal Music can collect on vinyl, a small amount of physical CDs, and streaming. My guess though is that “Songs of Innocence” will limited to streaming on iTunes Radio and not available on Spotify and other services.

Check mate.

Hats off to Guy Oseary who continues the tradition of taking U2 into brave new waters, started by Paul McGuinness.

Interesting take.

At the risk of sounding negative, hasn't the whole 'album sales don't matter, money is in touring and licensing' thing been the rule in the music industry for many years now? There's nothing particularly new here except for the scale (and the whole "we will give it to you even if you don't want it" approach). THIS IS NOT A DIG AT U2.

[stip]

If there is one thing we can all agree on ( fan and non fan alike),it is that The Miracle (of Joey Ramone) is (regardless of the merits of the song)(which I kinda dig), one of the worst song titles ever (by anyone)

[i got bugs]

Apparently this is just automatically downloading on people's iphones haha

[spike]

i hope the guy that hacked into apple's cloud and leaked all those n00dz hacks in again and automatically downloads backspacer to everyone's itunes.

[McParadigm]

I can't believe people think this is a great move. No wait actually I can believe it.

The delivery is in error, but the intention is not. Give me a huge band that tries to give their music away and fucks it up before a band that bitches about people downloading, anyday. Or, for that matter, one that becomes more interested in pushing fanclub memberships and merch catalog mystery boxes than in writing songs and trying out ideas.

The lyrics on this thing do seem to follow in the post-Zooropa tendency for lots of awfulness mixed with some clever one-liners ("the universe is beautiful but cold") and turned phrases. Beyond that, this is not an awful offering for a band whose story is basically over. It's melodically strong, the sonic landscape is consistently interesting, and if the sound isn't much changed from what came before, they at least continue to find interesting ways to twist it. Some of that probably comes from bringing new faces in, but I think you can hear (as always) hints of the band incorporating sounds other people have made since they last cut a record. For a band known for having such a distinctive sound, they've always had a bit of an underobserved pilfering habit.

There are a handful of songs here that, if I had never heard U2 before, would be enough to make me look into their catalog. Very little here is true garbage. None of it really sounds like it was written just to sell records to old people (why would it need to?). Hard not to be impressed by all that.

[VinylGuy]

You're right. Proper circlejerking requires your full attention.

It does. And a "We hate U2 thread!" would let all of you circlejerk over how fucking cool it makes you to hate U2 in 2014 without the horrible annoyance of dealing with people who have actually listened to the record in question and would like to share their thoughts on it with each other.

Now you know how I feel about pearl jam chat these days

Yeap.

Finally got the new album, about to listen to it now. As someone who liked the last two; im expecting a lot from this one.

[Heathen]

I can't believe people think this is a great move. No wait actually I can believe it.

The delivery is in error, but the intention is not. Give me a huge band that tries to give their music away and fucks it up before a band that bitches about people downloading, anyday. Or, for that matter, one that becomes more interested in pushing fanclub memberships and merch catalog mystery boxes than in writing songs and trying out ideas.

There are a handful of songs here that, if I had never heard U2 before, would be enough to make me look into their catalog. Very little here is true garbage. None of it really sounds like it was written just to sell records to old people (why would it need to?). Hard not to be impressed by all that.

To be honest, I'm not convinced that the band's intention here was to give their music away. This move seems to me about promoting Apple's products via U2's music more than it is about promoting their music via Apple's products. So you may be right in thinking it was not written to sell records but that doesn't mean money isn't the primary concern here. Bono said he doesn't believe in free music, they sold it to Apple instead of selling it to people but it doesn't look like simply giving music away in the same way that other bands have done before.

[McParadigm]

To be honest, I'm not convinced that the band's intention here was to give their music away. This move seems to me about promoting Apple's products via U2's music more than it is about promoting their music via Apple's products. So you may be right in thinking it was not written to sell records but that doesn't mean money isn't the primary concern here. Bono said he doesn't believe in free music, they sold it to Apple instead of selling it to people but it doesn't look like simply giving music away in the same way that other bands have done before.

That's true. But I don't disagree with the intention behind it, either (nor do I have a problem with his "I don't believe in free music;" I haven't downloaded without buying in ten years). It's just another in a line of bands willing to recognize that the wheel doesn't roll, anymore, and that other things have to be tried.

I'm not saying this is the greatest thing ever. If this was a new Smashing Pumpkins or Counting Crows record that was trying to force itself onto my phone, I'd be annoyed as shit. I'm just saying, it's a flawed result. That's fine, as long as THEY and APPLE realize it. There's some experimenting going on, here, and flawed results are the best kind of lesson.

[VinylGuy]

Why is this a flawed experiment? I dont get that.

Listened to the first 7 songs and i believe this might be a great album guys.

[stip]

I can't believe people think this is a great move. No wait actually I can believe it.

The delivery is in error, but the intention is not. Give me a huge band that tries to give their music away and fucks it up before a band that bitches about people downloading, anyday. Or, for that matter, one that becomes more interested in pushing fanclub memberships and merch catalog mystery boxes than in writing songs and trying out ideas.

Three whole sentences before this became about pearl jam? I take it you've yet to caffeinate this morning?

[stip]

Why is this a flawed experiment? I dont get that.

Listened to the first 7 songs and i believe this might be a great album guys.

You'll love the bottom half then (probably). It's not a top heavy record.

[McParadigm]

Why is this a flawed experiment? I dont get that.

Listened to the first 7 songs and i believe this might be a great album guys.

The delivery, not the record. It's a good record.

Three whole sentences before this became about pearl jam? I take it you've yet to caffeinate this morning?

Rank the responses you considered before choosing this one. Give each a star rating and a write-up, please.

[Blaine Ryan]

I can't believe people think this is a great move. No wait actually I can believe it.

The delivery is in error, but the intention is not. Give me a huge band that tries to give their music away and fucks it up before a band that bitches about people downloading, anyday. Or, for that matter, one that becomes more interested in pushing fanclub memberships and merch catalog mystery boxes than in writing songs and trying out ideas.

The lyrics on this thing do seem to follow in the post-Zooropa tendency for lots of awfulness mixed with some clever one-liners ("the universe is beautiful but cold") and turned phrases. Beyond that, this is not an awful offering for a band whose story is basically over. It's melodically strong, the sonic landscape is consistently interesting, and if the sound isn't much changed from what came before, they at least continue to find interesting ways to twist it. Some of that probably comes from bringing new faces in, but I think you can hear (as always) hints of the band incorporating sounds other people have made since they last cut a record. For a band known for having such a distinctive sound, they've always had a bit of an underobserved pilfering habit.

There are a handful of songs here that, if I had never heard U2 before, would be enough to make me look into their catalog. Very little here is true garbage. None of it really sounds like it was written just to sell records to old people (why would it need to?). Hard not to be impressed by all that.

The lyrics are definitely the weak point, and have been the weak point for U2 since…like…forever. But I really like this record. I think it has a lot of cool callbacks to just about every stage of their career. I think you can hear elements of Boy, the '90's more pop-centric stage, and of course the Joshua Tree and post-'00's dedication to huge, soaring anthems. But like you said, there are also some songs that sound more contemporary. "The Troubles" is one of those.

Which songs would you classify as "true garbage"? Haha.

[PryTo]

I haven’t loved the last couple of U2 albums and I need to spend more time with this one, but I respect that a filthy rich band, at this stage in its career, doesn’t just crank out cynical “product.” I get the sense that they put a huge amount of effort into their albums, recording, re-recording, scrapping ideas that aren’t working, reviving old ideas anew, working with different producers in different locations. I think they really care. They’ve said as much and they have the work ethic and the hours to prove it. Compare that to somewhat similar bands like PJ, who can barely tolerate a couple of weeks in the studio before calling it a day or the Stones (who haven’t made a record in a while) who have completely run out of creative juice. Props to U2 for the effort. I think they’re more interested in legacy than cash. (They’ve got the cash and the real money for them is in touring.)

[i got bugs]

Love all these people making it into a big deal about a free album.. As if anyone's paid for an album since the late 90s

[stip]

U2 actually is a band that I would have gone out and spent money on, so this saved me like 15$!