|
spacebrat311
|
 |
« Reply #40 on: January 07, 2009, 10:05:42 PM » |
|
I'm a cinematography major, haha. Don't talk photo with me unless you REALLY want to talk photo because once I start dissecting its all I can think about.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
sup.
|
|
|
|
Ian
|
|
« Reply #41 on: January 08, 2009, 02:43:56 PM » |
|
Alright, well I'm an Illustration and 3D animation major, so I guess you'd have me beat on photography knowledge, lol
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
murlough23
|
|
« Reply #42 on: January 08, 2009, 07:17:06 PM » |
|
I don't think that the technical ease or difficulty of capturing and/or Photoshopping this particular image really has that much of a bearing on whether it's a good choice for a U2 album cover. That's more of an aesthetic thing that is (sorry for the cliche) largely in the eye of the beholder.
I still say there's little point judging its value until we've heard the album.
If we want to talk about ill-conceived album cover art, let's talk about the cover Copeland's You Are My Sunshine, which should be called "Random picture of a bush that I took with my disposable camera through the car window in 1982."
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Ian
|
|
« Reply #43 on: January 08, 2009, 08:31:37 PM » |
|
I actually liked that one, despite it sharing several of the faults I criticized the U2 cover for. I guess the focus of the U2 cover seems kinda generic to me, where the Copeland cover didn't have a focus, so it was just a nice atmospheric effect. Now that I think about it, I probably would like the U2 cover more if they cropped it better and removed the boy and the street lines... which would turn it into a generic post-rock CD cover and most likely wouldn't fit U2's sound at all. :/
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
spacebrat311
|
|
« Reply #44 on: January 09, 2009, 03:18:15 AM » |
|
Alright, well I'm an Illustration and 3D animation major, so I guess you'd have me beat on photography knowledge, lol
That wasn't meant as an "I know more than you" so much as an "I tend to go overboard discussing this kind of thing." If it came of as elitist or braggy I'm sorry, that wasn't what I meant by it. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
sup.
|
|
|
|
Ian
|
|
« Reply #45 on: January 09, 2009, 11:28:33 AM » |
|
That wasn't meant as an "I know more than you" so much as an "I tend to go overboard discussing this kind of thing." If it came of as elitist or braggy I'm sorry, that wasn't what I meant by it.
Yeah, I know. You're fine.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Josh
|
|
« Reply #46 on: January 09, 2009, 11:48:49 AM » |
|
I think it's awesome that we got so much discussion out of what is probably a fake album cover.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
enemy anemone
|
|
« Reply #47 on: January 09, 2009, 11:52:05 AM » |
|
 I looked at the photobucket account from whence the cover came and got the impression that it's probably fan art. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
murlough23
|
|
« Reply #48 on: January 09, 2009, 02:50:31 PM » |
|
Watch the real album cover be less interesting now...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
spacebrat311
|
|
« Reply #49 on: January 09, 2009, 02:54:36 PM » |
|
Probably.
Kudos to that fan.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
sup.
|
|
|
|
AldaForPresident
|
|
« Reply #50 on: January 14, 2009, 05:45:19 PM » |
|
From @u2: According to a post today on the Art:21 blog, the "word on the street" is that U2's new album cover will be a seascape image from photographer Hiroshi Sugimoto. You can see a large version of the image on Hiroshi's home page. We're also hearing that this is the image U2 will use. If so, it certainly fits the idea of No Line on the Horizon. You can see a thumbnail of the pic on the website. Also, the single premieres Monday. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
enemy anemone
|
|
« Reply #51 on: January 14, 2009, 06:24:34 PM » |
|
ooh, nice. I wondered if they would go for a visual of "no line on the horizon" and thought that a seascape might be the only way to do that accurately. (my other thought was "but isn't a horizon a line? so maybe a visual is not really possible.")
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
murlough23
|
|
« Reply #52 on: January 14, 2009, 06:30:29 PM » |
|
They could flip it sideways and then it would be a Vertical Horizon... (or a Verizon for short)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Josh
|
|
« Reply #53 on: January 15, 2009, 08:34:44 AM » |
|
This is EXACTLY what I've been hoping for: [Bono] says 'No Line In The Horizon' is the album U2 always wanted to make. He always was an excitable fellow, but he might actually be right.
So what can I tell you without infringing copyright? It took two listens to find my way into it, which has to be good a thing. It is dense, twisty, shiny, modern pop music, a big mash up of Eno ambience, Edge electricity, rhythm and soul. There are verses and choruses, though not necessarily in that order (and quite often its hard to tell which is which). It doesn't feel the need to hit you over the head, but has the Ninja confidence to sneak up and take you unawares. It makes love like its making war. It hasn't frontloaded all its big guns. There is a surge in the middle perfectly timed to quell any uprising, and a killer twist at the end. It could be the glittering sonic mind meld of pop rock and soul that Zooropa wanted to be. Or maybe, like Bono, I'm am just prone to exaggeration.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
murlough23
|
|
« Reply #54 on: January 15, 2009, 01:20:01 PM » |
|
I have to laugh whenever a band says, "This is the album we've always wanted to make", and it's not their debut. Really? So then why didn't you make it before?
That said, this sounds like it's going to be a paradigm shift for U2, so it's either going to be really awesome or it's going to really suck. (Or seem to suck at first and then reveal its awesomeness... like Pop.)
NP: "Drops in the River", Fleet Foxes
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Brenden
|
|
« Reply #55 on: January 15, 2009, 04:51:09 PM » |
|
I have to laugh whenever a band says, "This is the album we've always wanted to make", and it's not their debut. Really? So then why didn't you make it before?
I can think of quite a few reasons off the top of my head. Label interference, I imagine new bands have little clout unless they already had a sizeable fanbase, they didn't know how to do it before, they learned some new skill or reached a new level of ability that finally allowed them to be able to make said album. Really, there's any number of reasons why a debut album might not be the album the band REALLY wants to make. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
murlough23
|
|
« Reply #56 on: January 15, 2009, 05:11:20 PM » |
|
Label interference, I imagine new bands have little clout unless they already had a sizeable fanbase, they didn't know how to do it before, they learned some new skill or reached a new level of ability that finally allowed them to be able to make said album. Really, there's any number of reasons why a debut album might not be the album the band REALLY wants to make.
Fair enough, but this is U2 we're talking about; they've had the clout and the budget to do whatever the hell they wanted since the mid-80's. my issue here is not that u2 made bad albums before (far from it), but that the "always" is a bit of an exaggeration. More likely, "This is the album we've been itching to make ever since we made our last album." |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
spacebrat311
|
|
« Reply #58 on: January 16, 2009, 12:03:17 AM » |
|
I like it lots less.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
sup.
|
|
|
|
murlough23
|
|
« Reply #59 on: January 16, 2009, 12:29:59 AM » |
|
I'm not such a big fan, but I suppose it might grow on me.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Brenden
|
|
« Reply #60 on: January 16, 2009, 01:14:06 AM » |
|
The new cover is boring and generic.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
enemy anemone
|
|
« Reply #61 on: January 16, 2009, 01:29:48 AM » |
|
I like the image on Hiroshi Sugimoto's home page, but the one on the ign page has a horizon line, plus extra lines. so I don't like it.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Josh
|
|
« Reply #62 on: January 16, 2009, 07:41:03 AM » |
|
I'd like it more without the big equals sign, of whatever that's supposed to be, but it's the least U2-like cover in a long time, which is exciting.
The official tracklisting:
1. No Line On The Horizon
2. Magnificent
3. Moment of Surrender
4. Unknown Caller
5. I'll Go Crazy If I Don't Go Crazy Tonight
6. Get On Your Boots
7. Stand Up Comedy
8. Fez – Being Born
9. White As Snow
10. Breathe
11. Cedars Of Lebanon
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
bloop
|
|
« Reply #63 on: January 16, 2009, 08:46:47 AM » |
|
Exciting is the word I'd least likely use to describe the cover, but the image matters so much less if this is yet another successful reinvention of U2.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Enjoy our pub. user/pw: thephorum Follow me on Grooveshark or Spotify. username: iceybloop |
|
|
|
Josh
|
|
« Reply #64 on: January 16, 2009, 08:54:04 AM » |
|
What excites me about it is that it's so different from the kind of cover they usually pick-- which could bode well for the change in direction they've been promising.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
murlough23
|
|
« Reply #65 on: January 16, 2009, 02:11:44 PM » |
|
I'm as neutral about it as the grey cover of the album. It's not exactly attention-grabbing.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
AldaForPresident
|
|
« Reply #66 on: January 19, 2009, 05:22:54 AM » |
|
"Get On Your Boots" RULES. It's on iTunes.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Aaron
|
|
« Reply #67 on: January 19, 2009, 07:47:26 AM » |
|
It's an interesting new direction for them on that song. I'm interested to hear the rest of the album before I rave or rant about it, obviously.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Josh
|
|
« Reply #68 on: January 19, 2009, 08:24:50 AM » |
|
I really like it, and think it bodes well for the new album. It's a new direction for them, but in a different way than Zooropa or Pop were new directions (not that I have anything against those albums, mind you!). It's adventurous and, for them, experimental, but also very hooky, radio-ready, and... well, gosh, it might be the most out-and-out FUN song they've ever recorded. Definitely a good omen, and sure to be a concert favorite.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
bloop
|
|
« Reply #69 on: January 19, 2009, 09:38:38 AM » |
|
Hmm . . . it just sounds like another rock song to me, honestly. It'll probably grow on me.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Enjoy our pub. user/pw: thephorum Follow me on Grooveshark or Spotify. username: iceybloop |
|
|
|
Aaron
|
|
« Reply #70 on: January 19, 2009, 09:49:14 AM » |
|
Hmm . . . it just sounds like another rock song to me, honestly. It'll probably grow on me.
Same here. It doesn't sound too out of the ordinary from alot of stuff today. However, it'll get a lot of press cause it IS U2. If it's the best song on the album, I'll be disappointed. If that's not considered the best song, then my hopes will still be high. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
murlough23
|
|
« Reply #71 on: January 19, 2009, 01:34:13 PM » |
|
Hmm . . . it just sounds like another rock song to me, honestly. It'll probably grow on me.
That's how I felt about "Vertigo"... which was the best song on the album. But it grew on me. (And the runner-up songs on HTDAAB were pretty solid.) |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Brenden
|
|
« Reply #72 on: January 19, 2009, 02:57:58 PM » |
|
I rather like it.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
murlough23
|
|
« Reply #73 on: January 19, 2009, 04:35:43 PM » |
|
Just listened to "Boots". To my ears, it sounded like a rather awkward attempt to be hip, but the vocals and overall approach were too thin to really pull it off. I will keep my first impressions of "Vertigo" in mind and trust that it will grow on me massively, since this is U2 and they've proven that their best stuff isn't always easily recognized upon first listen.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Ian
|
|
« Reply #74 on: January 19, 2009, 08:30:31 PM » |
|
Hate to say it, but this really sucks. Hopefully it will work better in the context of the album. I do like the drum-heavy part near the end though.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Aaron
|
|
« Reply #75 on: January 19, 2009, 08:59:17 PM » |
|
Hate to say it, but this really sucks. Hopefully it will work better in the context of the album. I do like the drum-heavy part near the end though.
It doesn't suck. Suck is a harsh word to use, usually reserved for an effort from Building 429. but hey..  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
murlough23
|
|
« Reply #76 on: January 19, 2009, 09:17:28 PM » |
|
It doesn't suck. Suck is a harsh word to use, usually reserved for an effort from Building 429. but hey.. I think "suck" is a better descriptor of the gap between a person's expectations and the actual result, rather than an objective measuring of the actual result. A merely decent song, coming from U2, can feel like it really sucks. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Aaron
|
|
« Reply #77 on: January 19, 2009, 09:24:01 PM » |
|
True. Like I said earlier, if this song is the best they give us on the album. I'll be pissed and say "This [disappoinment] sucks. Can't you give us a great album again?"
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
murlough23
|
|
« Reply #78 on: January 19, 2009, 09:27:13 PM » |
|
True. Like I said earlier, if this song is the best they give us on the album. I'll be pissed and say "This [disappoinment] sucks. Can't you give us a great album again?"
I would have to agree - but then, I have no idea how I'll feel about "Boots" by the time the album is released. If a song as idiotic as The Killers' "Human" can kinda sorta grow on me, then really anything's possible. (Except liking Building 429. They are the very definition of "suck".) |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Aaron
|
|
« Reply #79 on: January 19, 2009, 09:29:33 PM » |
|
If a song as idiotic as The Killers' "Human" can kinda sorta grow on me, then really anything's possible.
Wow, I didn't think that would happen. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
