Originally posted by mofothethird:Keep in Mind that Q always gave 5 or 4 star reviews for any major U2 release in the past decade . This says nothing.
Originally posted by badirishcharlie:[..]
As do Rolling Stone...no indication of quality
Originally posted by Remy:[..]
And so will Hotpress I guess.
I'm reviewing the @U2 album. Strictly embargoed and I've been told I can't say anything publicly until next week. But I trust they won't object to my saying that it's fucking fabulous. #SongsOfExperience
— Olaf Tyaransen (@OlafTyaransen) November 18, 2017
Originally posted by deanallison:Here’s a question to throw out there, if SOE has say 7 song on a 13 song album that you consider very good but the rest are between decent and poor how would you view the album? Would you be frustrated and see the overall project as a failure or look at it as we’ve got 7 really good new songs?
Originally posted by ahn1991:[..]
It really depends on how low the lows are, how high the highs are and how all the songs perform in the context of each other on the album. I can forgive average to below average songs if they fill their own niche in the album. Complete misses are obviously going to hurt an album's rating, but I've rarely found myself in a situation where I didn't know what U2 was doing when they put out a song.
The new @U2 album is almost here – and Bono talks exclusively to us about the new Songs of Experience https://t.co/19WhGKMNcG pic.twitter.com/csZi0r1NVz
— The Sunday Times (@thesundaytimes) November 19, 2017
"When your friend goes through trauma that could’ve been fatal, of course you’re concerned. We’re at an age where we have to think about our wellbeing, because when you see so many people just dying, it’s like, OK.. You start to put on the safety belts for the first time." - Edge
— U2start.com (@U2start) November 19, 2017
p Originally posted by Herok12:How do I pass the pay-wall?
