Quote
Kurt
Here's my only comment...

U2 didn't give ANYTHING away for FREE.

Apple gave something away for free.

Huge difference.

Correct but 99 out of 100 will think U2 are giving it out for free. Perception = reality here

Quote
Kurt
Here's my only comment...

U2 didn't give ANYTHING away for FREE.

Apple gave something away for free.

Huge difference.

By accessing your iCloud account. Most likely to make up for the iCloud breach... :/

At first listen, I hated "Songs of Innocence". But it's definetely a grower. After the third "spin" I liked some songs, after the seventh I loved the album.

What do you think about the lyrics? I think these are the most personal lyrics I have heard in a long, long time.

I don't like it, few good tunes but generally Boring. Like the previous one

Apple releases U2 album removal tool


"As we say in England, it can get a bit trainspottery"

<<Apple releases U2 album removal tool>>

<<Not everybody's a U2 fan as it's just discovered.>>

I think this was discovered some time ago.

<<U2's singer Bono acknowledged at the time that not everyone would appreciate the gift.>>

Which only adds fuel for his and their detractors who can now state, "Finally U2 have released an album they couldn't even give away."

I thought I was the only person not to get this album. Then I found out it's on my phone, not in iTunes on my computer. But I don't listen to music on my phone, so I haven't heard it. Seems like a harmless gesture on the part of U2/Apple, though, especially if you can delete it if you don't want it. I don't mind free stuff.

I truly don't understand how U2/Apple giving for free (and "free" it is not, but this is another discussion) can harm other artists.

With the only exception of Joshua Tree, I don't like U2 but I respect them alot.

I downloaded this U2 release for curiosity. Did it make me a U2 fan? No. Shall I stop buying other music? No.

If you see music as a business, well all businesses have rules. And these rules change with time. Some understand these rules better than others, or are able to change faster than others when the rules change. The music business is not better or worse than what it was 30 years ago. It's only different.

C

Papo, I love the lyrics most. The music is a little hard to swallow. More and more I'm thinking they were going for the 80's sound, which I believe is popular now. Anyhow, I suppose it's not bad overall. I have to play it a few more times I guess. Been about 5 times so far. On the subject of it being free it's hard for me to see the problem. Then again we're not all the same are we. Some say half full, others say half empty. And that's not going to change. The sooner a person realizes this the happier they'll be, imo.

Quote
RollingFreak

Quote
Naturalust
Another example of super rich rock stars killing what's left of the record industry by giving away their tunes for free.

Thats really the biggest thing. I'm a fan of this band Foxy Shazam (small indie band that I don't expect anyone to know) and they did this earlier this year. In about April, with no fanfare or anything, they just surprise released an album that is free to download through their website. But they are a small indie band no one cares about. For a major band like U2 to do this, its only making it more acceptable, and probably the way of the future. It makes a statement, and an even worse one by doing it through Apple. At least do it on your own through your website. By involving Apple, it just seems like total corporate shit.

Clearly the message here is, there is no money in album sales anymore and no one cares. See them live, either to see the hits or otherwise, and the money will go more directly to the band. I guess it goes both ways that this gets the music pretty directly to the listener, and the money for touring goes more directly to the band, but it still feels like something important is getting lost. A physical product, and a real reward for new music. I mean, come on. Do we really just rely on computers and files for EVERYTHING these days? Its pretty amazing how much has changed since even 20 years. And not to sound like an old fart, but it seems to be heading in a really bad direction.

Foxy Shazam, yeah, I love 'em!!!

'The Church of Rock'n'Roll' was brilliant I thought, I haven't got into the new one, 'Gonzo', yet; though I have it - I must give it some proper listens

After having the album a week, I must say my earlier comment on it has been totally changed; the album is absolutely a grower and I think it is perhaps their best since the mid 90s.

The last 3 have been very conservative on the whole, backing away from the more experimental 90s ('Achtung Baby', 'Zooropa', 'Passengers', 'Pop'), musically and lyrically going for a classicist U2 sound; sometimes it felt like pandering to what U2 thought the public wanted of them.

'No Line..' did venture back a little to more experimental and atmospheric territory, but, the new one really surpasses it in nearly every way.

Moody, atmospheric and brilliant songs like 'Sleep like a Baby tonight' and 'The Troubles' are very 'Achtung Baby/Zooropa', but though they are obviously influenced by that era, they are compelling pieces in their own right.

The tunes and Chic-style riffs on tracks like 'Volcano' (a highlight for me), 'This is where you can reach me now' and 'Cedarwood Road'are the grooviest and catchiest U2 have been in an age.

I haven't listened to a '2 album this much on release since 'Pop' (1997) - what was initially good but not great has really revealed its charms and gems over the week.

Nice one guys, it's a quality album.

"Remove iTunes gift album "Songs of Innocence" from your iTunes music library and purchases"

[support.apple.com]

"U2 you are business moguls not musicians anymore. No wonder you have to give your mediocre music away for free cause no one wants to buy it."
-Sharon Osbourne

> U2


Sharon Osbourne has hit out at U2 for allowing Apple to give away their new album to its customers.

'Songs Of Innocence' was announced and immediately released at Apple's iPhone 6 launch event last week (September 9), and free digital copies were delivered to 500 million iTunes users.

Music manager and TV personality Osbourne took to Twitter to tell the band what she thought of their campaign.

Osbourne wrote: "U2 you are business moguls not musicians anymore. No wonder you have to give your mediocre music away for free cause no one wants to buy it."

"Guys nothing is for free, how much you making? PS, btw you are just a bunch of middle age political groupies...."

"Whose political ass are we going to pull you out of today? Or are you front row at another tragic fashion show?..."

"Jimmy Iovine, iTunes, U2, you're a bunch of megalomaniacs. @#$%& YOU!"



Other critics of the stunt include the Entertainment Retailers Association, which said the giveaway was 'as damaging as piracy' and devalues music. ERA Chairman Paul Quirk said: "This promotion is a failure on so many levels. It devalues music, it alienates the majority of people who don't use iTunes and it disappoints those who prefer to shop in physical stores since few shops had U2 stock available. Giving away music like this is as damaging to the value of music as piracy, and those who will suffer most are the artists of tomorrow. U2 have had their career, but if one of the biggest rock bands in the world are prepared to give away their new album for free, how can we really expect the public to spend £10 on an album by a newcomer?"

'Songs Of Innocence' won't feature in the UK Albums Chart until its official October 13 release. The Official Charts Company told NME that the album is not yet eligible as customers will not have made an "active choice" to download it. Apple this week released a tool to allow its customers to 'Songs Of Innocence' from their devices with just one click, following complaints.

Bono said that Apple had bought the album as a "gift to give to all their music customers". Reports have suggested that the advertising and marketing provided by the tech firm could amount to $100 million (£62 million).

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

CUP OF JOE7
I LOVE U2 Haters!
BY JOEPIT · SEPTEMBER 17, 2014

We all have horrific character traits that lie deep within our souls that we are not proud to show to the world. Feelings that are best kept deep within, never to see the light of day. Well my friends, today is not that day. I cannot begin to express the joy my heart feels knowing that the way Apple/U2 released their new CD automatically into the world’s iTunes account has caused so much grief, anger and disgust amongst the U2 haters worldwide. The ten seconds it takes for them to delete one song adds an hour’s worth of smile to my face. The look of disgust when they first discovered that U2 infiltrated their iPods has easily added five years onto my life. With every tweet, Facebook post and article written about how the haters were “wronged” last week added so much light to my heart that it would keep the new Apple watch charged for at least a decade.


As we all know, U2 haters know no limits or geographic borders, and now we can add: that they don’t know how to read the terms of agreement of their Apple/iTunes account. Lawsuits have to be in the works, right? This move has to be a civil rights violation, no? Can congress declare war on Apple/U2 under the Articles of Confederation? Has Interpol been notified? Should the world go on official lockdown, code red, double secret probation due to this obvious act of terrorism? Forget about Kony – Africa’s most ruthless and maniacal rebel leader – get me Apple/U2! The World Court in The Hague awaits you! It’s clear that this move has sent the world spiraling off its axis and down a slippery slope that leads directly into a pool filled with Songs of a Innocence. Make no mistake about it my friends, Armageddon is upon us.

Just as fun as watching the haters froth at the mouth every time the new U2/Apple commercial plays are the intellectual tortoises that have publicly claimed not to know who U2 even is while shuffling through their minutia of one hit wonders. Really? You have an iPod, which U2 helped launch, and you’re claiming publicly not to know who U2 is? I can envision those ISIS nuts hiding in some Iraqi cave right now reading these tweets and posts by the haters thinking to themselves; “Overtaking the world will not be as hard as we thought.” I’m sure some people are just pretending to be too school for cool and say they never heard of U2, which is actually backfiring by illustrating just how f*cking stupid they truly are. I can’t name you one Justin Bieber song title, but I know who he is. Didn’t reading that your boy, Ryan Tedder from One Direction was called in to help U2 iron out a few songs add some street cred to U2? Do you even read?

Now, Apple has even created a tool for the haters to remove the automatic U2 download from their iTunes account. One has to wonder if Apple plans on creating a tool to show the haters how to use the tool? I mean, if they’re too lazy to read their terms of agreement or ignorant of what a TOA even is, how certain can Apple be about them using the tool properly? Instead, Apple should be sending the haters a different tool, such as a crowbar, so that the haters can pry their heads out of their asses.

I am begging for the hate to continue. I’m addicted to it now, like a needle to the spoon, and I can’t get enough of it. I hope somewhere deep in the bowels of Apple headquarters that the tech geeks are dreaming out loud and figuring out a way of getting U2’s next CD to automatically download to our phones and to play with every text message, ring tone, tweet, selfie, snapchat and Instagram and Facebook post. It’s 1984 all over again and Apple & U2 are the new Big Brothers! George Orwell is smiling somewhere right now. Fact!

I think that it's a good album.

Ha-ha, I love that sarcastic letter U2Stonesfan. That pretty much sums it up. It's funny to see how some people react to different things. That's life.

Found this Tweet in an article abiut the album and it is really funny:

@dimasario if you play a U2 song backwards, you'll hear messages from the devil. Even worse, if you play it forward, you'll hear U2. )

I am still laughing.

Quote
IrelandCalling4
After having the album a week, I must say my earlier comment on it has been totally changed; the album is absolutely a grower and I think it is perhaps their best since the mid 90s.

My original reaction was 'What is with this trendy shit so after the fact?' but it has grown on me.

No way is it better than any LP they've released since the mid-90s though. They've had two pretty damn good LPs in the Twenty Hundreds so far (NLOTH is weak, the title track and Magnificent are the best tracks on it, the rest is pedestrian U2 at best). Give it a year or so to see where this one really sits.

Hi Gaslight,

I'd have to disagree; I find NLOTH actually the best of the trio from the 2000s. HTDAAB I think is U2's poorest album; save for a few highlights, it's very weak; meandering songs, melodies not very strong.

ATYCLB had huge singles, but it just seemed so conservative, very workmanlike and it is inspired in certain places, but for me (I know many love it) a bit dull.

NLOTH was more experimental, but it has lasted longer for me than the previous 2, I still listen to it while I rarely, if ever, play the preceeding albums in full.

I honestly think the new one is better than all three, and is their best since, arguably, 'Zooropa' - only time will tell of course, but I think it's better than 'Pop'.

Priceless: [www.whoisu2.com]

Quote
mr edward
Priceless: [www.whoisu2.com]

and refreshing.

Special thanks to Sharon Osbourne for her sanctimonious,green-eyed rant.

Quote
IrelandCalling4
Hi Gaslight,

I'd have to disagree; I find NLOTH actually the best of the trio from the 2000s. HTDAAB I think is U2's poorest album; save for a few highlights, it's very weak; meandering songs, melodies not very strong.

ATYCLB had huge singles, but it just seemed so conservative, very workmanlike and it is inspired in certain places, but for me (I know many love it) a bit dull.

NLOTH was more experimental, but it has lasted longer for me than the previous 2, I still listen to it while I rarely, if ever, play the preceeding albums in full.

I honestly think the new one is better than all three, and is their best since, arguably, 'Zooropa' - only time will tell of course, but I think it's better than 'Pop'.

POP may be U2's DIRTY WORK in accordance to their discog.

Quote
leteyer
Found this Tweet in an article abiut the album and it is really funny:

@dimasario if you play a U2 song backwards, you'll hear messages from the devil. Even worse, if you play it forward, you'll hear U2. )

I am still laughing.

that is good. I don't know when, I don't know where, but I will use that one.

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
IrelandCalling4
Hi Gaslight,

I'd have to disagree; I find NLOTH actually the best of the trio from the 2000s. HTDAAB I think is U2's poorest album; save for a few highlights, it's very weak; meandering songs, melodies not very strong.

ATYCLB had huge singles, but it just seemed so conservative, very workmanlike and it is inspired in certain places, but for me (I know many love it) a bit dull.

NLOTH was more experimental, but it has lasted longer for me than the previous 2, I still listen to it while I rarely, if ever, play the preceeding albums in full.

I honestly think the new one is better than all three, and is their best since, arguably, 'Zooropa' - only time will tell of course, but I think it's better than 'Pop'.

POP may be U2's DIRTY WORK in accordance to their discog.

but Zooropa was had a Lemon

33 million people have accessed the new LP.

"Just six days after its release on iTunes, a record breaking 33 million people have already experienced the album," Eddy Cue, Apple's SVP of Internet Software and Services, said in a statement to Mashable. When asked what "experienced the album" means, an Apple spokesperson clarified that it means "listened to it" — either on iTunes, iTunes Radio or Beats Music.


That means the 33 million figure takes into account when people pushed play on iTunes, or streamed the album on iTunes Radio and Beats Music.


[mashable.com]

And there's this:

Apple released a statement claiming that 33 million people had "experienced" the U2 album, meaning that they had listened to some or all of it through streaming or downloading. That represents 6.7 percent of the 500 million iTunes customers Apple says it has. Many marketing campaigns might be happy with such a response, but this was a case of free content delivered to people's virtual doors with them having to take no action at all. In other words, Apple couldn't succeed in giving the album away and ultimately felt enough pressure to give them a way to delete it.

[www.cbsnews.com]

POP is indeed their 'Dirty Work'. Much maligned, it spawned a massive tour; Popmart is as big as stadium rock can get methinks; it didn't have the cool of Zoo TV, but it was a spectacle in and of itself.

The album was good, but not great; some sterling songs, and some I'm sure the '2 would rather forget about.

Zooropa, one of the weirdest albums any major league stadium rock band have released maybe; but, experimental U2 that hits more than it misses is infinitely more interesting than bland and conservative U2 designed to tread water.

Quote
IrelandCalling4
POP is indeed their 'Dirty Work'. Much maligned, it spawned a massive tour; Popmart is as big as stadium rock can get methinks; it didn't have the cool of Zoo TV, but it was a spectacle in and of itself.

The album was good, but not great; some sterling songs, and some I'm sure the '2 would rather forget about.

Zooropa, one of the weirdest albums any major league stadium rock band have released maybe; but, experimental U2 that hits more than it misses is infinitely more interesting than bland and conservative U2 designed to tread water.

Ha ha! Yeah, at least they toured for their DIRTY WORK!

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
IrelandCalling4
POP is indeed their 'Dirty Work'. Much maligned, it spawned a massive tour; Popmart is as big as stadium rock can get methinks; it didn't have the cool of Zoo TV, but it was a spectacle in and of itself.

The album was good, but not great; some sterling songs, and some I'm sure the '2 would rather forget about.

Zooropa, one of the weirdest albums any major league stadium rock band have released maybe; but, experimental U2 that hits more than it misses is infinitely more interesting than bland and conservative U2 designed to tread water.

Ha ha! Yeah, at least they toured for their DIRTY WORK!

I went to one of their shows on that tour, and that's when I started hating U2 (OK hates a bit strong), so perhaps it's better the Stones DIDN'T tour Dirty Work.