entertainment

In unusual step, U2 reinterprets 40 of its best-known songs

15 Comments
By DAVID BAUDER

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2023 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.


15 Comments
Login to comment

Theyve become what they once despised, but that happened quite some time ago.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The Greatest Irish Rock-n-Roll Export has been doing remixes of their hit singles even when they were initially released. They've been issuing remix EPs like 'U2-7' (seven tracks from their 2000 album remixed) and more all along. This really isn't anything new, not for these guys. 

I don't know if they are" the greatest" Irish rock band, but they were very good at one point, I think there were better Irish bands, but they are the most recognizable for sure, as for the music, I can't really so so much about their remixes, I think when a band does a remix of anything, you really need to know what you are doing and what style you want to work with, remixes don't always work for every genre and for the most part U2's music doesn't seem to fit within that remix mold, of course, music is always subjective, but I don't see it happening.

And that's the BEST attitude about it. Paul McCartney keeps making new music, he recently put out a 'techno' version of his 'rockdown' CD 'McCartney III'.

I will say that I do have a fundamental problem with McCartney going off on a music tangent, it hasn't always worked so well for him in the past, it's always a hit or misses with him, but he did write some very intricate basslines that are technically and rhythmically a challenge as a Beatle and later with Wings, defintely some of his songs from that era were underrated.

Of course other acts like Taylor Swift, Pink Floyd and even Blue Oyster Cult have released rerecorded and/or remixed CDs. Pink Floyd especially has done that for 2 albums already.

Swift, I am not at all surprised, the woman is a great marketer without a doubt.

Besides, U2 has been dabbing with techno since 1988's 'Rattle and Hum'. And I just LOVE that 'Zooropa' CD from 1993 - thirty years ago.

With all due respect I think IMHO Zooropa was the bands worst album it just sucked and a lot of the critics excoriated that album. Personally, I think that after Rattle and Hum, the bands best days were over, but up until that point they produced some of the most memorable music in the late 70's and early 80's.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

What in the name of blue hell are they wearing???

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

The last time I checked, no-one is being forced to buy their music. People do have a choice, if you don't like what they are doing, don't buy it or listen to the music on any streaming service. I for one, will be following my own advice and not giving a damn about these remixes.

Simple really.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

And I just LOVE that 'Zooropa' CD from 1993 - thirty years ago.

Absolutely! Brian Eno production magic.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

I love U2 and look forward to these remixes ! The Unforgettable Fire and Achtung Baby were outstanding albums.

As for those cynics suggesting U2 are doing this for a cash grab, get real. They are all equally worth hundreds of millions.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Fans often dislike remixes and may consider them cash grabs, but musicians often want to explore and rework their own music. They are creative folk. They can feel trapped within the confines of the hits that define them in the public imagination. The ones the punters want to hear at every single gig.

It's about viewing the creative process from two sides. Musicians want to experiment. An audience that grew up on specific tracks may want to stick with the originals - especially if it is the soundtrack of their youth.

The Greatest Irish Rock-n-Roll Export has been doing remixes of their hit singles even when they were initially released. They've been issuing remix EPs like 'U2-7' (seven tracks from their 2000 album remixed) and more all along. This really isn't anything new, not for these guys.

 Any musician who still cares about music is going to create regardless of whether anyone wants to hear it or not. Otherwise they become cover bands for their own music.

Guys like Robert Plant or Jeff Beck have never rested and continued to explore music without seeking commercial gain. Plant especially has refused to regroup Led Zeppelin. A wealthy musician especially shouldn't care about whether the fans will like it. Money should give them the freedom to pursue their art.

And that's the BEST attitude about it. Paul McCartney keeps making new music, he recently put out a 'techno' version of his 'rockdown' CD 'McCartney III'. Of course other acts like Taylor Swift, Pink Floyd and even Blue Oyster Cult have released rerecorded and/or remixed CDs. Pink Floyd especially has done that for 2 albums already.

Besides, U2 has been dabbing with techno since 1988's 'Rattle and Hum'. And I just LOVE that 'Zooropa' CD from 1993 - thirty years ago.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

Sounds like a tree falling in the forest with no one around to hear it.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Basically cover versions of their own songs. As with all cover versions, if they can bring something new and good to the song, then that's good.

Golden era U2 is all about the big Lanois/Eno production and the Edge playing through that rack-mounted digital delay, which credit to him was his own sound, so I don't know how much will be left if you strip that away. The Edge is a pretty good singer, so that's one thing they could utilize more.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Many older artists don't see the point of making new music, since there's little opportunity to be heard and fans are partial to the familiar stuff, anyway, said Anthony DeCurtis, Rolling Stone contributing editor.

In other words, he is saying it is all about the money for them. Any musician who still cares about music is going to create regardless of whether anyone wants to hear it or not. Otherwise they become cover bands for their own music.

Guys like Robert Plant or Jeff Beck have never rested and continued to explore music without seeking commercial gain. Plant especially has refused to regroup Led Zeppelin. A wealthy musician especially shouldn't care about whether the fans will like it. Money should give them the freedom to pursue their art.

This seems like a halfway step for U2. Maybe it will be interesting. But I would think new music would be more interesting. If they want younger fans they should do something new to draw them in, like Sparks has done.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Why? Oh right, money grab.

Not really. Music doesn't just freeze when it is recorded, a recording is only a single snapshot of the song at a given time. Songs evolve over time, and a band like U2 who has been playing for decades have probably seen ways to evolve their music in new ways they'd like to explore. This is part of their repertoire, not their history.

Don't like it? Don't buy it. But it's silly to whine about it.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

It's unlikely to be about money. These are not poor people.

Fans often dislike remixes and may consider them cash grabs, but musicians often want to explore and rework their own music. They are creative folk. They can feel trapped within the confines of the hits that define them in the public imagination. The ones the punters want to hear at every single gig.

It's about viewing the creative process from two sides. Musicians want to experiment. An audience that grew up on specific tracks may want to stick with the originals - especially if it is the soundtrack of their youth.

'They're both valid' is a good quote.

This happens in other arts as well, but not so often. Wordsworth rewrote 'The Prelude' later in life. The original was the work of a young rebel poet. The later version isn't. Many people (including me) prefer the original, but they are both valid as works of literature.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Spot on @tokyo_joe! Seems like inflation is hitting these multi-millionaires hard, too. Now they're "reinventing" their music to pay for upgrades to their mansions and private jets. Oh the horror of it all.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

Why? Oh right, money grab.

-2 ( +5 / -7 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites