Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 19:37:41 -0800
From: "AssociationWorks" <AssociationWorks@comcast.net>
To: <audities@smoe.org>
Subject: Re: new U2
Message-ID: <00aa01c4cb8d$a07c8980$902c0718@Franklin>

> But it never quite
> reaches the depths (or heights) of Unforgettable Fire or The Joshua Tree
> or Achtung Baby or.....

"War"..perhaps?

It's funny how few people reference early U2.


I may be one of the few who does. I remember when U2's first American
single, "I Will Follow", was played on WXRT for the first time; within 24
hours my college roommate hopped on the el and made a beeline to the late,
lamented Wax Trax to buy the 45. I loved "I Will Follow", still do. It may
have set the template for the band's now-familiar sound, but it seemed
completely unique and novel back in '81.

I own a few U2 albums, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that I'm a fan of
the band. I find about 75% of their material to be pretty tedious, and Bono
the Omnipresent Righteous Rock Star has a tendency to grate on my nerves.
But what interests me about the band is the fact that they run counter to my
basic musical sensibilities. I have always stumped for the primacy of the
song itself where pop music is concerned. But with U2, it's the *sound* of
particular songs that seems to drag me in -- Edge's sharp Morse Code surf
lick on "Three Sunrises" and Clayton's rubbery bass line on "Salome", to
cite examples from two of my favorite U2 songs. I think that the sonic
oddity of "I Will Follow" is what led me to listen to the band primarily in
terms of soundscapes rather than songs, contrary to the usual way that I
listen to music.

In that respect, I guess, they've managed to keep me mildly interested in
them even though I don't consider myself a U2 fan.


Gregory Sager