Drop some digital bombs

[wolbersu2]

The band wants an album that's different and that's fully supported by all four members. That's a good thing. But.... The wait is a bit long. Why not drop material on the internet? Songs not used on albums because they don't fit can work commercialy on their own. U2 is so oldfashioned in these things.
I would pay for digital releases as:
Mercy, North star, Every breaking wave, Stingray,
Glastonbury, Boy falls from the sky, Magnificent with gospelchoir, Get on your boots with gospelchoir, Winter (movie version), Soon and all the rare material that didn't make the fantastic U22-album. I think most of us would pay for these kind of releases.
Releasing an album once in four years is fine, but throw in something new more frequently please. And I don't mean soloprojects like Spider-Man or Cold dream colour...

[Broadsword]

I have to say I totally support this idea. Hell, the more music we get, the better. I know that the band has only been able to maintain the level of quality we expect because they are so discriminating as far as what songs actually see release, but there are so many things that we fans already know about that we would be willing to buy, just to have them on an official release. I'd love to get my hands on North Star as it was in the Transformers film. Just a little something to bide our time. It doesn't have to be a big deal with lots of fanfare. There was a very poor quality demo leaked years ago with a chorus that went something like " all my life I've been Waiting for..." I think it was from the Rick rubin sessions...I'd love to hear that. A full band version of Boy Falls... I mean, heck, start releasing good quality audio recordings of shows from past years. I'd gobble them up! I know they exist! What about the things already released that are true rarities, things that didn't even make it on to the Complete U2 "boxed set"...some of the promo edits and the like. Give those a broader release!

[lemonfly]

Originally Posted by wolbersu2

The band wants an album that's different and that's fully supported by all four members. That's a good thing. But.... The wait is a bit long. Why not drop material on the internet? Songs not used on albums because they don't fit can work commercialy on their own. U2 is so oldfashioned in these things.
I would pay for digital releases as:
Mercy, North star, Every breaking wave, Stingray,
Glastonbury, Boy falls from the sky, Magnificent with gospelchoir, Get on your boots with gospelchoir, Winter (movie version), Soon and all the rare material that didn't make the fantastic U22-album. I think most of us would pay for these kind of releases.
Releasing an album once in four years is fine, but throw in something new more frequently please. And I don't mean soloprojects like Spider-Man or Cold dream colour...

I actually respect them for NOT doing that. Digitally releasing leftover tracks that didn't make the cut on a proper U2 album for one reason or another just seems a little tacky and a bit of a cashgrab. If they had a project that they knew wouldn't be commercially fulfilling as an "official" U2 album release with all the bells and whistles, then by all means a digital release would be ideal (the mythical SoA seems to have been a good candidate for this). But farting out some individual tracks that were never good enough to make the grade - a big no-no. I'm glad they have a reasonably high "quality control" filter when it comes to releasing material.

[purpleoscar]

Dammit! I want to hear the 80 versions of Breathe!

I'm sure lots of this stuff will come out when U2 retire.

[DeVaul]

Originally Posted by lemonfly

I actually respect them for NOT doing that. Digitally releasing leftover tracks that didn't make the cut on a proper U2 album for one reason or another just seems a little tacky and a bit of a cashgrab. If they had a project that they knew wouldn't be commercially fulfilling as an "official" U2 album release with all the bells and whistles, then by all means a digital release would be ideal (the mythical SoA seems to have been a good candidate for this). But farting out some individual tracks that were never good enough to make the grade - a big no-no. I'm glad they have a reasonably high "quality control" filter when it comes to releasing material.

I disagree. Releasing digital-only singles, as Radiohead does, could serve to enrich the catalog while allowing them to maintain a mood/theme throughout an entire album without resorting to the impulsive inclusion of out-of-place "hit singles." Even an EP of these leftover tracks could be a neat peak into the studio and likely worth $5 of curiosity.

[LemonMelon]

Some threads make me wish U2 would bomb Interference.

[doctorwho]

Originally Posted by LemonMelon

Some threads make me wish U2 would bomb Interference.

But this isn't one of them.

I don't think this is a bad idea. Most of these songs have appeared in concert. Some were used to advertise and some are in a Broadway play. These aren't some scraps of material best left vaulted - these are songs U2 performed and have used.

I wouldn't mind seeing some of these be more officially released.

[Broadsword]

Originally Posted by doctorwho

But this isn't one of them.

I don't think this is a bad idea. Most of these songs have appeared in concert. Some were used to advertise and some are in a Broadway play. These aren't some scraps of material best left vaulted - these are songs U2 performed and have used.

I wouldn't mind seeing some of these be more officially released.

I agree exactly. I expect that most of the songs I'm thinking of will be discarded or forgotten and I just think that's a shame.
Another one I'd love to get ahold of...circa 2002 there was supposed to be a commercial Hands That Built America single, with a remix of Playboy Mansion as the B-side. I know lots of people hate Playboy Mansion, and certainly the lyrics aren't as universal as some of Bono's best, but I love the perfect pop sensibility and gorgeous harmonies in the song, and i'd be thrilled to hear another working of the song. I know that this is less immediate than most of the sons we've been discussing but, to me, at least, this is another forgotten gem. Lol maybe some day the band really will get around to remixing the whole of Pop, but I expect that's a topic for another thread.

[doctorwho]

Originally Posted by Broadsword

I agree exactly. I expect that most of the songs I'm thinking of will be discarded or forgotten and I just think that's a shame.
Another one I'd love to get ahold of...circa 2002 there was supposed to be a commercial Hands That Built America single, with a remix of Playboy Mansion as the B-side. I know lots of people hate Playboy Mansion, and certainly the lyrics aren't as universal as some of Bono's best, but I love the perfect pop sensibility and gorgeous harmonies in the song, and i'd be thrilled to hear another working of the song. I know that this is less immediate than most of the sons we've been discussing but, to me, at least, this is another forgotten gem. Lol maybe some day the band really will get around to remixing the whole of Pop, but I expect that's a topic for another thread.

U2 may not release that exact song, but over the years, many artists have released remixed versions of their past albums. Even The Cure did this. U2 did release "Melon" and "Artificial Horizon" as a nice fan club items, which is pretty close. Maybe they'll have more???

Nothing wrong with having songs for purchase through U2.com. Fans would happily buy the songs that didn't make U22 or songs we suggested throughout this thread. I get if U2 wants to hold on to something like "Glastonbury" as they may release it officially but in a completely different form (or use it as a b-side). But remixes or live versions of tracks would be welcome!

[Moser]

But how many U2 fans would accuse of them of trying to make a few more bucks off album crumbs?

[purpleoscar]

It's pretty clear the band want something fresh and exciting to be released next so if there are any tidbits coming it will likely happen after a new direction. Releasing deluxe remasters is another good way to keep releasing interesting material that didn't make it as an A or B side.

[Broadsword]

Good points about the deluxe edition remasters, and the remix possibilities. It kinda gives me hope to think of the possibilities, even after the band decide they no longer wish to continue making new music. Some day we'll get a proper boxed set with all kinds of outtakes, mixes, etc! Lol

As far as people complaining, it seems that happens every time the band does anything at all. The bottom line, for me anyway, is that the band and I each have something the other wants. They have music I want to hear and I have money, which I wish to exchange for said music. Releasing music online as a download is a relatively inexpensive, risk free way for the band to get new music into the hands (or ears) of the consumers. It'll probably never happen, but the fantasy makes me smile.

[trevgreg]

Originally Posted by lemonfly

I actually respect them for NOT doing that. Digitally releasing leftover tracks that didn't make the cut on a proper U2 album for one reason or another just seems a little tacky and a bit of a cashgrab. If they had a project that they knew wouldn't be commercially fulfilling as an "official" U2 album release with all the bells and whistles, then by all means a digital release would be ideal (the mythical SoA seems to have been a good candidate for this). But farting out some individual tracks that were never good enough to make the grade - a big no-no. I'm glad they have a reasonably high "quality control" filter when it comes to releasing material.

Considering the complaints that some fans have about songs that DID make an album, I don't think that it would make too much of a difference there. I'm sure all of us can name some songs that made, say, the Medium Rare album that we preferred over tracks on some of their official albums.

[Shawn Bonneau]

Releasing two song singles like The Beatles did between albums would work. Some of those singles were their biggest hits

[doctorwho]

Originally Posted by Shawn Bonneau

Releasing two song singles like The Beatles did between albums would work. Some of those singles were their biggest hits

Bono has said he'd love to release singles between albums.

Unfortunately, only "A Celebration" was ever truly released as a single, and that was early in U2's career.

Other songs that U2 released were part of a soundtrack ("Hold Me..." and "The Hands that Built...") or a compilation album (remake of "Sweetest Thing", "Electrical Storm", etc.).

While releasing singles for a reason (movies or compilation CD's) is justified, I do wonder how a U2 single, for not apparent reason, would be received. Even if the song is tied to a commercial, ala "Vertigo", to gain promotion, would it still become a hit?

When the Beatles did this, singles were more accepted (over albums). It seems that time has come again - artists are still respected for albums, but it's the singles that sell (via iTunes). So perhaps a single here and there might be the way to go - if U2 release the "right" single.