CHUD.com Community › Forums › MUSIC › Music › New U2 - No Line In The Horizon - March 2nd
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New U2 - No Line In The Horizon - March 2nd

post #1 of 112
12/19/08 at 10:03am
Thread Starter 
So we were talking about the 90's era of U2, yesterday they officially announced the release date and name of the new album.

It's been 5 years since HTDAAB. I'm ready to listen.

http://www.u2.com/news/index.php?mode=full&news_id=2279
Reply
post #2 of 112
12/19/08 at 10:19am
Ah, another sleeping aid. Awesome . My insomnia has been getting the best of me lately.
Reply
post #3 of 112
12/19/08 at 11:04am
Apparently this is another experimental album, like POP. Hope they don't go too leftfield, they work best as a rock 'n roll album.
Reply
post #4 of 112
12/19/08 at 11:06am
Thread Starter 
After the two last albums (All you can't was great upon release, now i can only listen to a few tracks) being so similar, i'm ready for them to go somewhere else.
Reply
post #5 of 112
12/19/08 at 11:11am
Agreed. While I'm all in for another Joshua Tree, I'd welcome another Pop immediately before getting another All you can't.
Reply
post #6 of 112
12/19/08 at 11:45am
I don't get it. How is a horizon not a line? Sounds like something I'd write in grade school...I guess it's a way of saying there is no horizon and we're fucked. And their grammar just as much so.
Reply
post #7 of 112
12/19/08 at 12:03pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by dreary louse View Post
I don't get it. How is a horizon not a line? Sounds like something I'd write in grade school...I guess it's a way of saying there is no horizon and we're fucked. And their grammar just as much so.
There's a lot of things you don't get.
Reply
post #8 of 112
12/19/08 at 12:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by dreary louse View Post
I don't get it. How is a horizon not a line? Sounds like something I'd write in grade school...I guess it's a way of saying there is no horizon and we're fucked. And their grammar just as much so.
I didn't know you were still in grade school. That actually makes a lot of sense.
Reply
post #9 of 112
12/19/08 at 2:48pm
I said "I would" as in, if I were actually in grade school at my age, whereas U2 is even further removed from their past education, and therefore the title is even more embarrassing.

Surely you can pick a less minor moment of mine to criticize. As it is, I'm disappointed my adversaries on this board can be so petty. Mildly irritating like a rash. I better watch my fingers on these keys so I don't mispell something. Also, make sure you wash your hands after shitting out a little comeuppance, you may get a bacterial infection when fingering your own asshole.

At least there were valid points in the Obama thread I made. I'm not much of a pragmatist!
Reply
post #10 of 112
12/20/08 at 4:11pm
I am hellbent on seeing them in concert when they tour next year.
Reply
post #11 of 112
12/21/08 at 2:37am
It'd be nice if they surprised me again, but it doesn't look good. They used to be my favorite band way back when.
Reply
post #12 of 112
12/21/08 at 3:10am
Quote:
Originally Posted by dreary louse View Post
I said "I would" as in, if I were actually in grade school at my age, whereas U2 is even further removed from their past education, and therefore the title is even more embarrassing.
I don't think U2 are bothered by past glories at this point in their career, it's a title, I don't see what's so embarrassing about it.
Reply
post #13 of 112
12/21/08 at 1:08pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by dreary louse View Post
I said "I would" as in, if I were actually in grade school at my age, whereas U2 is even further removed from their past education, and therefore the title is even more embarrassing.
You were complaining about their grammar using a grammatically incorrect sentence. You probably should have written "Sounds like something I would have written in grade school" to make the intended point, but you didn't. You can't complain about me picking on your grammar in a post that's picking on someone else's grammar.

Quote:
Surely you can pick a less minor moment of mine to criticize.
I regularly do, but you tend to miss the point.
Reply
post #14 of 112
12/21/08 at 1:11pm
Want to revive your love for U2? Go see U2 3D. Saw it on IMAX earlier in the year and I ate up every minute of it. It reminded me why I love this band so much.

I've liked the majority of their albums, some more than others, but I don't think they've ever put out a truly bad one. Sure, they've played it "safe" from time to time, but the songwriting has been consistently strong over the last 3 decades.
Reply
post #15 of 112
12/21/08 at 6:03pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveB View Post
You were complaining about their grammar using a grammatically incorrect sentence. You probably should have written "Sounds like something I would have written in grade school" to make the intended point, but you didn't. You can't complain about me picking on your grammar in a post that's picking on someone else's grammar.
But my sentence is grammatically correct. "...I would write in grade school", but I'm not in grade school and therefore wouldn't write that way. Christ. My post was more succinct than your version, but you were seeking a spot for ridicule, as did Martin Savage with the beginning of my post. Fucking wankers. One would have to be awfully dense to not understand what I meant. And my point was that it's unclear what U2 was trying to say with their title! I've forgotten why I started coming here.
Reply
post #16 of 112
12/21/08 at 10:28pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by dreary louse View Post
Fucking wankers.
You're from Winnipeg. Stop it!

ETA: No, it's not grammatically correct. Grade school happened in the past it's not happening currently as your sentence would suggest.
Reply
post #17 of 112
12/21/08 at 11:10pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan S~ View Post
You're from Winnipeg. Stop it!
Sorry, we white canadians just tend to leech off other places/cultures for there is little slang of our own...besides the "eh", which I use...besides, the office of Queen Elizabeth had to be consulted and allowed a party to shut down our government...I suppose that may be close enough a connection...not quite...but ehn. I guess that is how different words develop...not that I am british at all or wish to be...that would be strange...
Reply
post #18 of 112
12/24/08 at 1:53pm
I haven't been able to tell the difference between any U2 song in a long, long time so something a little "out there" would be fine by me.
Reply
post #19 of 112
1/5/09 at 9:44pm
Here's a preview of 10 tracks from the album via Rolling Stone:

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/sto...on_the_horizon
Reply
post #20 of 112
1/6/09 at 9:26am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
"Tripoli"
This strikingly experimental song lurches between disparate styles, including near-operatic choral music, Zooropa-style electronics, and churning arena rock.
Quote:
"Moment of Surrender"
This seven-minute-long track is one of the album's most ambitious, merging a Joshua Tree-style gospel feel with a hypnotically loping bass line and a syncopated beat.
Those sound great, i can't wait.
Reply
post #21 of 112
1/6/09 at 10:18am
Sounds interesting. I had head they were aiming for an experimental moroccon feel. Not sure if that would work
Reply
post #22 of 112
1/16/09 at 9:23pm
Official tracklisting, album cover, and 1st single announced:

http://www.u2.com/highlights/?hid=517

Album cover:

http://www.u2.com/image.php?img=http...=image%20extra

Probably my fave U2 album cover since Achtung Baby.
Reply
post #23 of 112
1/16/09 at 9:36pm
This thread is interesting. I have to agree with Louse on the grammar debate.

He said "sounds like something I'd write in grade school." If he were in grade school, [whatever he was talking about] is something he'd write. There's no claim about whether he's enrolled in grade school today or ever.

Plus, "would" can describe the past. "Every day in 1988, I would listen to The Joshua Tree." Or whatever.

"I'd have written" would also be fine, and would include the implication that he used to attend grade school, or that, had he done so, it would have been at a certain time in the past. But that's not necessary to the grammar, I don't think, even though it makes a lot more sense outside of it.

So who wants to talk about U2?
Reply
post #24 of 112
1/16/09 at 10:06pm
Thread Starter 
Fantastic Cover. Really intrigued by the album. I'm more excited about this that i was about their last 2 records.

This is a great feeling. We had an amazing comeback from Metallica, a brilliant return to form from REM, nothing will please me more than to see U2 back rocking.
Reply
post #25 of 112
1/19/09 at 12:42pm
Just heard the first single on the radio. Composition is aces (as always). Lyrically? Disappointed.

I will, of course, give it more than one listen but was definitely underwhelmed.
Reply
post #26 of 112
1/19/09 at 12:46pm
Thread Starter 
http://www.hipersonica.com/2009/01/1...-on-your-boots

you can listen to it on that link.
Reply
post #27 of 112
1/19/09 at 12:53pm
I'm underwhelmed, too. But I like Bono's vocals. I was hoping for something more infectious with the 1st single. This could be another 'The Fly', where the genius of the song will become readily apparent once the album hits. Or maybe not.
Reply
post #28 of 112
1/19/09 at 1:02pm
Thread Starter 
I'm in love with the drums and some of the guitar. The rest i need to listen to it a hundred more times.
Reply
post #29 of 112
1/19/09 at 1:05pm
Come on Tati, it's just a first impression. Tell us what you really think.
Reply
post #30 of 112
1/19/09 at 1:06pm
Thread Starter 
I like that they are not afraid to experiment. It certainly sounds different.
But i'm not sold yet. I don't know if it was the right choice for a first single. The music is catchy, yes. But overall, i think it's too out there to have a clear view of what the record will be like.
Reply
post #31 of 112
1/19/09 at 1:11pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tati View Post
I like that they are not afraid to experiment. It certainly sounds different.
Different from them, yes. I got a Franz Ferdinand vibe from the single. I hope that isn't the route that decided to take on this album. (not bashing Franz at all, just the aping of their sound).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tati View Post
But i'm not sold yet. I don't know if it was the right choice for a first single. The music is catchy, yes. But overall, i think it's too out there to have a clear view of what the record will be like.
Agreed. Too early to have a clear view, but I am at least intrigued (but still underwhelmed).
Reply
post #32 of 112
1/19/09 at 5:18pm
The Fly II. I like it better than the Eric Stoltz movie. I get Zooropa vibes and even some Radiohead in the chorus ("you don't know how"). It's like their last three records never happened.
Reply
post #33 of 112
1/19/09 at 10:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tati View Post
Overall, i think it's too out there to have a clear view of what the record will be like.
Not sure if any of you heard the tracks that were leaked in the fall - recorded from a phone offshore while Bono cranked them at his pad in France! - but they were pretty fantastic. The new single is one of them, and it supports the notion that this will be a pretty adventurous album. I think we're in for a treat.
Reply
post #34 of 112
1/19/09 at 11:46pm
It's nothing earth shattering, but it's still a welcome departure after the adult contemporary of the last album. And good to hear that Eno/Lanois found a place for some handclaps amongst all the bleeps.
Reply
post #35 of 112
1/20/09 at 9:19pm
Thread Starter 
Ok, reality check. Nowhere near the utter brilliance of The Fly. I don't know what started those comparisons, but not a fucking chance.
Not musically nor lyrically.

The new single is like a retard child of Vertigo and Even Better Than The Real Thing. I welcome it, i actually like it. But The Fly? no way.
Reply
post #36 of 112
1/21/09 at 2:42pm
I was surprised by it. Better then I was expecting. It sounded like Achtung/Zooropa era music (good) with Pop era lyrics (bad). I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt and actually listen to the album. I couldn't even get through all of How To Dismantle...that's how dissapointed I was.

You have to give it credit: the song is riskier and better than that horrible Vertigo single.
Reply
post #37 of 112
1/23/09 at 10:54am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parker View Post
I was surprised by it. Better then I was expecting.
Same here, and I'm definitely not a U2 fan, never have been actually. But the verse groove sounds like something David Holmes produced ca. his Exit Sign album. May be a little out of date, but then again so am I, at my age.
And I really like the layered vocals in the chorus... anyone else notice an almost westcoast pop influence there? Combined with a Thom Yorke-esque melody line. Not something they've done in the past, from what I know (but as I said, I may know preciously little about the band).

all in all: curious to hear more.
Reply
post #38 of 112
1/26/09 at 9:26am
Really disappointing. I don't know when U2 exactly lost it, but aside from Vertigo, I already didn't care much for Dismantle and it just seems to continue that way. Leave had some good tunes, but nothing on it would have made that band a classic. It all just sounds so lazy... lacking enthusiasm and strength.

Sure, tickets will sell like crazy again, but only because of the old stuff.
Reply
post #39 of 112
1/27/09 at 11:38am
I can't get past the fact that, during the verses, this is all I can hear.
Reply
post #40 of 112
2/6/09 at 1:48pm
Thread Starter 
Video premieres today.
Reply
post #41 of 112
2/6/09 at 1:53pm
I've listened to the new song about 10 times now. I must admit that I don't really care for it, but I don't mind the fact that they are trying something more reminiscent of the 'Achtung Baby'/'Zooropa' era.

eta: my wife pointed out the 'Wild Wild West' similarity to me. Now, THAT'S all that I can hear too.
Reply
post #42 of 112
2/6/09 at 2:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt M View Post
I can't get past the fact that, during the verses, this is all I can hear.
A-fucking-men.

They could have at least copied the source.
Reply
post #43 of 112
2/7/09 at 1:08am
I would like to hear a hardcore fan's defense of this new song. They actually managed to make a blander single than Vertigo. So, is the 2nd or 3rd single going to be the sappy ballad?
Reply
post #44 of 112
2/7/09 at 2:57am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle Reese View Post
I would like to hear a hardcore fan's defense of this new song. They actually managed to make a blander single than Vertigo. So, is the 2nd or 3rd single going to be the sappy ballad?
Why? You're obviously not a fan to begin with.

I don't love the tune, but it has grown on me. The way the song is structured, layered, and produced is actually more interesting than the songwriting itself.
Reply
post #45 of 112
2/7/09 at 3:07am
Thread Starter 
The video looks like a BOND film opening credits sequence on drugs. Not sure that's a good thing.
Reply
post #46 of 112
2/8/09 at 3:11am
I just stumbled upon the song for the first time on Youtube.

Oh, God, it's the first U2 song that I just flat-out HATE.

THIS is the shit that they are going to be playing when (God and Ticketmaster willing) I see them live for the first time this year when they hit the road? This is what the whole album is going to sound like? What a bland, bleh song. I'm truly stunned and disappointed right now.
Reply
post #47 of 112
2/8/09 at 11:55am
No mention yet of the strong Zeppelin influence? There's the half-assed, almost sheepish, quotation of "When the Levee Breaks" and the main guitar riff could be an outtake from Physical Graffiti.

It might work better live if they sloooow it down and let that riff breathe a little bit.
Reply
post #48 of 112
2/8/09 at 6:08pm
This song is "alright, but closer to good than bad" to me.

And I kinda like the video - it may be a monstrous misuse of all sorts of visual trickery, but I dig it.
Reply
post #49 of 112
2/9/09 at 1:56am
They played Get On Your Boots to open the Grammys and it did sound better live.
Reply
post #50 of 112
2/9/09 at 11:07am
I never had a problem with the "sound." Unfortunately, with the words showing up on the screen behind them the problems I had upon first listening to the song became more concrete. Lyrically, I don't know where they've gone and I just plain don't like it.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Music
CHUD.com Community › Forums › MUSIC › Music › New U2 - No Line In The Horizon - March 2nd