Karine Maucourt ([email protected])
Fri, 28 Aug 1998 10:46 +0200 (MET)
Just thinking....if it's an album like RH, i won't consider it like
a Greatest Hits album but like RH as a studio/live album. BTW, i always
consider a Greatest Hits album with only one-two new songs is a bad thing.
From Renee :
>1) if Pop wasn't by U2 would you like it? After being very honest with
>myself, I have decided that if Pop wasn't a U2 CD, I would not have given
>it the time of day. I only listened to it continuously (and grew to love
>it) because it was U2. If it was anyone else, I would say it was crap
>techno, and I didn't like it at all. Dont get me wrong - I think it is
>brilliant - but I wonder why my real reasons for thinking this are.
About this, i think i would like Pop because i listen to many other
bands and i can love some of their songs too. Moreover, i always listen to
the U2 albums before buying them, trying to get a critic eye on the stuff.
But i'm sure i love it more because it contains the "U2 label". I mean, it
often happened i recognized a new U2song before the radio said it because i
recognized their "label". It can be Bono or Edge or Adam or Larry. And if
the album was made by another band, i wouldn't recognize any U2 member
characteristic on it. So, i would like it but not love it.
In the name of love
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2 on Fri Aug 28 1998 - 01:30:15 PDT