GEN
Active topics
U2 - Mercy
 Era:
2000-2009
  1. Originally posted by vanquish:[..]

    It it true that there is no high quality mp3 ? apparently the original upload all those years back was only 128 kbps Mp3 (or WMA) and all the supposed 'high quality' versions floating around are just transcodes of that file into a higher bitrate. There was no good quality rip done direct from the CD.
    Can anyone confirm this?

    [..]


    Leaked originally to Interference by a girl who clearly didn't know that 128Kbps WMA is all that good. WMA isn't a bad format but 128Kbps isn't a good rip either. I've seen FLAC transcodes, 192Kbps MP3 and even a 64Kbps one. It's a shame because I'm not sure that girl is around much anymore otherwise I'd have asked her for a HQ FLAC rip - although WAV would be better.
  2. Originally posted by vanquish:[..]

    It it true that there is no high quality mp3 ? apparently the original upload all those years back was only 128 kbps Mp3 (or WMA) and all the supposed 'high quality' versions floating around are just transcodes of that file into a higher bitrate. There was no good quality rip done direct from the CD.
    Can anyone confirm this?

    [..]


    Don't give Bono ideas!

    [..]

    And you're probably the biggest Mercy fan on here.

    I also can't believe the took out the binary code (violins/Nero) couplet which was possibly the best line in the entire song. It doesn't seem quite right with the short intro.

    There was never a problem with the melody of the studio chorus, just the lyrics could have been more subtle. Now they've gone the complete opposite direction and changed it to a jarring, uptempo one with dismally bad lyrics.





    I agree.

    The thing with Mercy is, although not quite lyrically spectacular by any means, it has parts to the song which fit together beautifully. A lot of the lyrics actually, in my opinion, are similar to that of Beautiful Day/UETEOTW. They aren't complex, like some of their previous stuff, but it certainly have the potential into becoming a hit song like Beautiful Day.

    Which reminds me, the start of any U2 song is quite important - the build up to the chorus. In all hit songs, like WOWY, ISHFWILF, BD, etc, all build up to the chorus, with a descriptive opening, it's almost like the recipe for a great U2 song. With this live version, it seems like they have gone against that, and stripped it down into something far too simple - which I believe, doesn't leave much left to work with.
  3. Originally posted by u2opra:[..]

    I agree.

    The thing with Mercy is, although not quite lyrically spectacular by any means, it has parts to the song which fit together beautifully. A lot of the lyrics actually, in my opinion, are similar to that of Beautiful Day/UETEOTW. They aren't complex, like some of their previous stuff, but it certainly have the potential into becoming a hit song like Beautiful Day.

    Which reminds me, the start of any U2 song is quite important - the build up to the chorus. In all hit songs, like WOWY, ISHFWILF, BD, etc, all build up to the chorus, with a descriptive opening, it's almost like the recipe for a great U2 song. With this live version, it seems like they have gone against that, and stripped it down into something far too simple - which I believe, doesn't leave much left to work with.


    Yep, the should bring back the preamble to the chorus. I like the live version, though - the studio version sounded a tad too long to me.
  4. Originally posted by u2opra:[..]

    Which reminds me, the start of any U2 song is quite important - the build up to the chorus. In all hit songs, like WOWY, ISHFWILF, BD, etc, all build up to the chorus, with a descriptive opening, it's almost like the recipe for a great U2 song. With this live version, it seems like they have gone against that, and stripped it down into something far too simple - which I believe, doesn't leave much left to work with.


    Likelihood of any released version resembling a facsimile (ie 100% identical) to this live version = 0.


  5. I think that's a seperate issue - whether U2 will use more parts from the studio version, from what I was discussing.

    I was merely saying that the original Mercy had the recipe for a popular hit, even if the lyrics aren't that great.

    I think it's fairly obvious U2 are going in a completely different direction.
  6. Originally posted by drewhiggins:[..]

    Leaked originally to Interference by a girl who clearly didn't know that 128Kbps WMA is all that good. WMA isn't a bad format but 128Kbps isn't a good rip either. I've seen FLAC transcodes, 192Kbps MP3 and even a 64Kbps one. It's a shame because I'm not sure that girl is around much anymore otherwise I'd have asked her for a HQ FLAC rip - although WAV would be better.


    Yea so all the FLAC transcodes are a waste of space, since the original was only ever 128 kbps WMA.

    I wonder why interference hasn't contacted her to get a better rip.
  7. I definately hated the the new chorus after hearing it a couple of times on Youtube/bootlegs, but now that i heard it live, it actually kinda works
  8. Double
  9. Originally posted by BelgianBono:I definately hated the the new chorus after hearing it a couple of times on Youtube/bootlegs, but now that i heard it live, it actually kinda works


    Nah it doesn't, it's just the effect of hearing it live - the same reason why being at a concert always sounds better than the bootleg or concert DVD. It's like the placebo effect.
  10. Was nice to hear live, but it still sounds somekind of unsatisfying.
  11. Originally posted by vanquish:[..]

    Nah it doesn't, it's just the effect of hearing it live - the same reason why being at a concert always sounds better than the bootleg or concert DVD. It's like the placebo effect.


    Indeed. I remember one of the first things I thought after seeing my first U2 gig was "well that wasn't like the dvd's I've watched thousands of times!"

    Because it really isn't. I'm sure if I hear that new Mercy live I'll enjoy it, but right now I don't like it at all. Even if they release it, I'm still going to listen to the demo, I love it, I love the old chorus, and I can't stand the new one. It's like they changed it a tiny bit to make it more contemporary and give it more structure. Why? What's wrong with a 6 minute ballad that's simple yet complex? I loved the demo for that, it was all lyrics and a nice groove by the band. I hate that "because beacuse" crap, it stands out and it just seems unnecessary to me.
  12. Originally posted by RattleandHum1988:[..]

    Indeed. I remember one of the first things I thought after seeing my first U2 gig was "well that wasn't like the dvd's I've watched thousands of times!"

    Because it really isn't. I'm sure if I hear that new Mercy live I'll enjoy it, but right now I don't like it at all. Even if they release it, I'm still going to listen to the demo, I love it, I love the old chorus, and I can't stand the new one. It's like they changed it a tiny bit to make it more contemporary and give it more structure. Why? What's wrong with a 6 minute ballad that's simple yet complex? I loved the demo for that, it was all lyrics and a nice groove by the band. I hate that "because beacuse" crap, it stands out and it just seems unnecessary to me.


    Literally my thoughts exactly, thank you
U2start is run by fans for fans. Help us reduce personal costs. Consider to make a donation to support us.
U2start is run by fans for fans. Help us reduce personal costs. Consider to make a donation to support us.
U2start is run by fans for fans. Help us reduce personal costs. Consider to make a donation to support us.
U2start is run by fans for fans. Help us reduce personal costs. Consider to make a donation to support us.