Jimmy Iovine says album needed 2 more songs

[PowerSurge]

Well, in this day and age, getting a bonus disc of songs that may include some that are "better" (read: greater subjective preference) is not much of a problem. Just load up all the songs on iTunes and move/delete as you wish to create your own personal new U2 album.

Now, I realize that this approach is problematic for many (including me), but surely getting the bonus songs would be a good thing. I think if the songs are truly finished, it doesn't make sense for U2 to hold them to be mixed/matched on future albums. This way you get U2's artistic statement in album form, AND you get all the songs. And you don't run into the potential problems of releasing a really long album or double album that doesn't flow/hold together just right.

I agree.

If they're finished then release them either as part of the album or as a bonus package and let the fans decide if they want some or all of them. I think the way we're looking at the "flow" of an album is changing dramatically due to how we are buying them (i.e. itunes) Fans can mix and match however they want. I think there still is something to be said about the flow of an album, but its not as relevant as it used to be. Hopefully U2 don't overthink it and just release the best songs they've got.

 

[bram]

I agree.

If they're finished then release them either as part of the album or as a bonus package and let the fans decide if they want some or all of them. I think the way we're looking at the "flow" of an album is changing dramatically due to how we are buying them (i.e. itunes) Fans can mix and match however they want. I think there still is something to be said about the flow of an album, but its not as relevant as it used to be. Hopefully U2 don't overthink it and just release the best songs they've got.

I definitely agree with you, although I still consider albums to be the pinnacle of rock/pop music. Great songs are, well, great. But there is nothing like the magic of an album that WORKS for you on every level. That's why I will be (apparently in the very small minority) not at all disappointed (and even a bit relieved) when/if the final tracklist shows up with 10-12 songs.

 

[U2DMfan]

So we went from Jimmy Iovine saying the band wanted to hammer out 2 more 'album worthy' songs so they could 'complete' the album to talking about when they are going to release the second fucking album of a double album.

This makes so little sense it's hard to wrap my head around.

Artdirector is a solid poster, and from memory, he's had good info before but I am going to say (ESPECIALLY based on that hyperbolic lunacy that he posted; The Beatles and Elvis bit) is that his source is full of sheeeet.

 

[pepokiss]

This makes so little sense it's hard to wrap my head around.

welcome to Interference

 

[PowerSurge]

I definitely agree with you, although I still consider albums to be the pinnacle of rock/pop music. Great songs are, well, great. But there is nothing like the magic of an album that WORKS for you on every level. That's why I will be (apparently in the very small minority) not at all disappointed (and even a bit relieved) when/if the final tracklist shows up with 10-12 songs.

I hear you on that. Let me take back what I said before....there's A LOT to be said about the flow of an album indeed. I can actually think about a variety of albums that I listen to from song 1 all the way to the end but for some reason can't listen to all of the songs individually and get the same "oomph". As U2 albums go, I feel that "The Unforgettable Fire" is a perfect example, and even "Boy" for that matter give me that "oomph" that the individual songs don't. So I definitely hear what you're saying there.

I guess I'm just making that album flow remark based on the current culture of music and what I've observed people doing. Its more common for people to have various ipod mixes (i.e. workout mix, chillin' mix, party mix, etc) as opposed to listening to entire albums on their ipod straight through. Thats kind of what I was getting at.

I do hope this album flows, but I guess I'm not expecting another Dark side of the Moon or Sgt.Peppers to come from this next album.

 

[bram]

I hear you on that. Let me take back what I said before....there's A LOT to be said about the flow of an album indeed. I can actually think about a variety of albums that I listen to from song 1 all the way to the end but for some reason can't listen to all of the songs individually and get the same "oomph". As U2 albums go, I feel that "The Unforgettable Fire" is a perfect example, and even "Boy" for that matter give me that "oomph" that the individual songs don't. So I definitely hear what you're saying there.

I guess I'm just making that album flow remark based on the current culture of music and what I've observed people doing. Its more common for people to have various ipod mixes (i.e. workout mix, chillin' mix, party mix, etc) as opposed to listening to entire albums on their ipod straight through. Thats kind of what I was getting at.

I do hope this album flows, but I guess I'm not expecting another Dark side of the Moon or Sgt.Peppers to come from this next album.

Yeah that definitely makes sense and I agree with pretty much all of it. I'm cautiously optimistic that this album will be their best in terms of flow (right now I consider AB to have that title; although you're right--UF is another great example).

 

[bram]

So we went from Jimmy Iovine saying the band wanted to hammer out 2 more 'album worthy' songs so they could 'complete' the album to talking about when they are going to release the second fucking album of a double album.

This makes so little sense it's hard to wrap my head around.

Artdirector is a solid poster, and from memory, he's had good info before but I am going to say (ESPECIALLY based on that hyperbolic lunacy that he posted; The Beatles and Elvis bit) is that his source is full of sheeeet.

I think you have to take into account the possibility that Iovine likely heard the "album" in it's "finished" state from July (remember when they had the album-completion party?). So it's entirely possible that the subsequent work could account for both of these seemingly contradictory statements. I'm not saying it's probable, but I think there is a plausible explanation there.

 

[PowerSurge]

Yeah that definitely makes sense and I agree with pretty much all of it. I'm cautiously optimistic that this album will be their best in terms of flow (right now I consider AB to have that title; although you're right--UF is another great example).

How did I forget about AB????

YES, thats easily number one. Zoo Station all the way to Love is Blindness. GREAT FLOW INDEED! I haven't listened to that album in a long long time. This discussion might make me break that one out again.

I know this is the wrong place to discuss it and that people here have analyzed and overanalyzed that album about a billion times elsewhere on this forum, but that album is as close to a concept album as U2 ever got. Didn't Bono talk about the album being about birth all the way to death? Zoo Station being the birth and Love is Blindness being the funeral at the end with all of the trials and tribulations of life in the middle; relationship, heartbreak, betrayal, marriage, infidelity, drunkeness LOL! Just a fucking nearly perfect album in terms of flow.

 

[bram]

How did I forget about AB????

YES, thats easily number one. Zoo Station all the way to Love is Blindness. GREAT FLOW INDEED! I haven't listened to that album in a long long time. This discussion might make me break that one out again.

I know this is the wrong place to discuss it and that people here have analyzed and overanalyzed that album about a billion times elsewhere on this forum, but that album is as close to a concept album as U2 ever got. Didn't Bono talk about the album being about birth all the way to death? Zoo Station being the birth and Love is Blindness being the funeral at the end with all of the trials and tribulations of life in the middle; relationship, heartbreak, betrayal, marriage, infidelity, drunkeness LOL! Just a fucking nearly perfect album in terms of flow.

This is a brilliant post--and now I want to break out the album too!

Maybe after work.

 

[phillyfan26]

U2's best flow album is by far The Unforgettable Fire. Achtung Baby has a poor tracklisting (not aided by the poor mixing/production).

 

[U2DMfan]

I think you have to take into account the possibility that Iovine likely heard the "album" in it's "finished" state from July (remember when they had the album-completion party?). So it's entirely possible that the subsequent work could account for both of these seemingly contradictory statements. I'm not saying it's probable, but I think there is a plausible explanation there.

It's a solid point but here's really what I'm getting at:

From roughly July/Aug 2008 (when they thought they had completed the album) working back to the Fez sessions and all, it's been nearly 2 years of recording. Whatever number that is, time in the studio, coupled with U2's track record of 2 years of recording for HTDAAB, another 18 months for ATYCLB, a solid 15 or more months for POP, all to produce about the same amount of songs. Around 15 +/-

I think U2's method of operations is to get to that number of 'album worthy' songs. Which would be 14-20 (whatever). All of this makes complete sense to me.

Take HTDAAB, delayed an entire year.
I can name exactly one original song that came out of that extra year.
Crumbs. The rest of them are either re-writes, re-recordings or leftovers from previous sessions. I reference the list from the white board on ATYCLB for one example.

So my point really is, this is U2 we are talking about.

When Iovine said they need the two songs, it made complete sense to me, once again. They probably voted, and agreed on 8, 9 or 10 of the songs but felt they could hammer a few of the others back into shape, and in the meantime try some new stuff in this creative vein.

To assume that they would be somehow trying to 'up the ante' and re-doing all of those 'extras' for a double album doesn't make much sense to me, using U2's track record.

Let's say in July 2008 U2 had 18 songs ready to go, voted on by the U2 democracy. And let's say they decided they want 2 more songs to go with this double album instead of a single album.

Who here is going to make the argument that this makes any sense in light of U2' history, of not only struggling to agree on merely 11 or 12 album tracks, but getting that many quality tracks that they can agree on in such a short period?

I'm saying if U2 had 18 songs in July that were 'this' good, they'd pick the 12 best and release them in time for the prime sales period.

I think in light of all of this, I think the most simple explanation is the best.
They needed two more songs for a single album and decided ("what's the rush to get it right?"). If they were hurryng a double album it would be nothing but rushing.

All that said, I would be very, very, very, very pleased with a double album.
I just don't think people should lose sight of who we are talking about here.
Think of the HTDAAB example again. An extra year for what, honestly?

 

[Utoo]

U2's best flow album is by far The Unforgettable Fire. Achtung Baby has a poor tracklisting (not aided by the poor mixing/production).

I've gotta disagree, but then I'm a huge AB fan talking to a huge AB critic.

After reading Flanagan's description of AB using James Joyce's "Nighttown" locale, I've never been able to listen to the album the same way----and I enjoy it even more. Basically, a man frustrated in his relationship delves into Nighttown, a place of lust, frivolity and temptation, and ultimately at the end returns to deal with what's left of the marriage.

I love the analogy, and can practically envision a play in my mind as I listen to the album straight through. Fantastic.

 

[U2DMfan]

Achtung Baby has a poor tracklisting (not aided by the poor mixing/production).

Them's fighting words, philly.

If you want to talk about Achtung's production, I'll just cite one of my previous posts on the subject of the guitar sound etc. I won't go over it again.

That said, I don't give a shit about tracklisting/flow.

The single most overrated aspect of albums, hands down.

 

[dan_smee]

It's a solid point but here's really what I'm getting at:

From roughly July/Aug 2008 (when they thought they had completed the album) working back to the Fez sessions and all, it's been nearly 2 years of recording. Whatever number that is, time in the studio, coupled with U2's track record of 2 years of recording for HTDAAB, another 18 months for ATYCLB, a solid 15 or more months for POP, all to produce about the same amount of songs. Around 15 +/-

I think U2's method of operations is to get to that number of 'album worthy' songs. Which would be 14-20 (whatever). All of this makes complete sense to me.

Take HTDAAB, delayed an entire year.
I can name exactly one original song that came out of that extra year.
Crumbs. The rest of them are either re-writes, re-recordings or leftovers from previous sessions. I reference the list from the white board on ATYCLB for one example.

So my point really is, this is U2 we are talking about.

When Iovine said they need the two songs, it made complete sense to me, once again. They probably voted, and agreed on 8, 9 or 10 of the songs but felt they could hammer a few of the others back into shape, and in the meantime try some new stuff in this creative vein.

To assume that they would be somehow trying to 'up the ante' and re-doing all of those 'extras' for a double album doesn't make much sense to me, using U2's track record.

Let's say in July 2008 U2 had 18 songs ready to go, voted on by the U2 democracy. And let's say they decided they want 2 more songs to go with this double album instead of a single album.

Who here is going to make the argument that this makes any sense in light of U2' history, of not only struggling to agree on merely 11 or 12 album tracks, but getting that many quality tracks that they can agree on in such a short period?

I'm saying if U2 had 18 songs in July that were 'this' good, they'd pick the 12 best and release them in time for the prime sales period.

I think in light of all of this, I think the most simple explanation is the best.
They needed two more songs for a single album and decided ("what's the rush to get it right?"). If they were hurryng a double album it would be nothing but rushing.

All that said, I would be very, very, very, very pleased with a double album.
I just don't think people should lose sight of who we are talking about here.
Think of the HTDAAB example again. An extra year for what, honestly?

I don't think they will make a double album.

All I will say in defence of that idea is that one of the best double albums I know of: The Whitlams - Little Cloud and the Apple's Eye, has 8 or 9 tracks on each disc. They all fit onto one cd, but they made it a double album because of the themes (disc 1, little cloud written about his part of Sydney - Newtown, disc 2, the apples eye, written while in new york).

It could be that they have 15 or 16 songs for a double album because of two very obvious themes. Now, it would make sense that they would want two more songs to complete the album, as disc one (lets call it Sea) has 6 tracks, and disc two (Sky) has 9. They may want two more for Sea to even it out a bit you see?

Having said that, im pretty sure itll be a single disc!

 

[Irishteen]

One of my favorite things about U2 is collecting their singles. I'd be pretty disappointed if they stopped releasing them. But I can't imagine record companies make any money off of CD singles any more, so it wouldn't surprise me if there are no more.

I was surprised HTDAAB had so many single releases, by then the single was already dead plus U2 were embracing Itunes so much with that album and The Complete U2.

I don't think they'd stop but this might be interesting to you

In the UK which is the biggest singles market in terms of physicals, Oasis have topped the physical charts. However that isn't even enough to get them into the top ten in the singles chart.

U2's singles are going to be massive flops on this album compared to the last. I mean they're not gonna hit the top in the UK with several singles unless they really find a way to appeal to the younger crowd. If they rely on Physicals they'll have a massive flop with all singles after the first one

I think U2 will release physicals with the new album but mostly I'd say through U2.com and other online stores, you'll be hard pressed to find them in regular record stores anyway.

b-sides?
do people still buy singles?

B-sides are generally now just the bonus songs on a digital "single/EP" that people download. Physical singles are now really all but dead

 

[IndyShade]

U2's best flow album is by far The Unforgettable Fire. Achtung Baby has a poor tracklisting (not aided by the poor mixing/production).

Hey, Philly - I'm new to your posts. I wholeheartedly agree with you on The Unforgettable Fire - which is my favorite album ever by anyone, even though I wouldn't call U2 my favorite band anymore - so I am surprised by the panning of Achtung Baby, at least as far as the mixing and production go. I don't want to derail the thread, but I'd genuinely like to hear your criticism. If you've posted your thoughts before, could you give me a point in the right direction?

 

[dan_smee]

Hey, Philly - I'm new to your posts. I wholeheartedly agree with you on The Unforgettable Fire - which is my favorite album ever by anyone, even though I wouldn't call U2 my favorite band anymore - so I am surprised by the panning of Achtung Baby, at least as far as the mixing and production go. I don't want to derail the thread, but I'd genuinely like to hear your criticism. If you've posted your thoughts before, could you give me a point in the right direction?

I think the basic arguement with the mixing is that the guitar is very muddy, and Bono's voice is always too distorted, and the drums sound a bit like they are coming down a wind tunnel.

I don't think that it equates to "bad" production, Eno and lanois aren't capable of 'bad' production or mixing, I think it is more a case of bad production CHOICES. That is, if you don't like it!

 

[StaySafeTonight]

But wasn't that distorted, muddy, kind of dirty sound they were going for on Achtung Baby? I thought it was better that they recorded it that way. It had flaws, it had rough edges, but it felt more alive and organic compared to the squeaky clean production of the Joshua Tree.

 

[Chill Mike D]

I wouldn't call Joshua Tree "squeaky clean." It really does sound like it was recorded in somebody's house with all the windows open.

 

[JOFO]

Which is half it's charm.....

the ambience is brilliant for the material/themes...

 

[Chill Mike D]

Oh sure, I think it's part of its charm too.

 

[dan_smee]

But wasn't that distorted, muddy, kind of dirty sound they were going for on Achtung Baby? I thought it was better that they recorded it that way. It had flaws, it had rough edges, but it felt more alive and organic compared to the squeaky clean production of the Joshua Tree.

i agree with you, thats why in my response i highlighted the word CHOICE. they chose that sound, and people can evaluate themselves whether they think it's good or bad

 

[LemonMelon]

U2's best flow album is by far The Unforgettable Fire.

I'd agree if the second half weren't a complete trainwreck.

Their best flow album is probably Boy, in my opinion anyway.

 

[powerhour24]

AB, JT then Boy for me.

 

[phillyfan26]

Hey, Philly - I'm new to your posts. I wholeheartedly agree with you on The Unforgettable Fire - which is my favorite album ever by anyone, even though I wouldn't call U2 my favorite band anymore - so I am surprised by the panning of Achtung Baby, at least as far as the mixing and production go. I don't want to derail the thread, but I'd genuinely like to hear your criticism. If you've posted your thoughts before, could you give me a point in the right direction?

I can't find them right now, but the gist of my argument is that it's Edge's best guitar record, only you wouldn't know it because you either can't hear his guitar in the mix or they played a bunch of muddled sounds over each other at once. My usual examples are:

Zoo Station: chorus (can't hear it)
Even Better than the Real Thing: riff (can barely hear it)
Until the End of the World: outro (muddled)
The Fly: from mid-way through the solo to the end (too many sounds at once)
Mysterious Ways: chorus (quiet)
Tryin' to Throw Your Arms Around the World: Whole song
Ultraviolet: the bridge (I remember when we could sleep...)
Love Is Blindness: Bono sings over the whole solo so you can't hear it

It's a fantastic album when performed live. All of these defects are corrected in the live setting. But in the studio, it was a rushed, muddled effort that did the songs no justice. People say it was meant to be that way, but I don't really care. Intentional or not, it doesn't sound nearly as good as it does live, The reason being the production.

 

[Irvine511]

Their best flow album is probably Boy, in my opinion anyway.

yes, absolutely. Boy is probably the closest thing they have to a successful concept album. it's their most thematically consistent and coherent work and it stands together as a whole.

 

[phillyfan26]

Boy is my third favorite U2 album. It doesn't really have any weaknesses.

 

[cseggleton]

I agree everyone has a right to their opinions and Choice....but my God the things people nit pick. UF, JT, AB are amazing pieces of work. i could go on a tirade but i would be accused of being a u2 apologist....ok guilty as charged....I do get a little defensive when people nit pick my band. i guess here is the deal with u2 for me. they are more than a band. u2 are my band...like bono says about the band it is like being part of a gang...these guys are my gang. every album to some extent speaks to me at different stages of my life. I am not sure if any other band has albums that i listen to and they take back to place where i was in life or to where i am today. aint it cool to be a part of their tribe. i have a pretty good life and i am thankful for a lot of things, my wife, my kids, my health......but i sure don't know what things would be like if i did not have my band to fall back on. i can have a shitty day but when i throw some u2 for the ride home it sure makes things a little better.

 

[cseggleton]

phillyfan "The fly too many sounds at once" isn't that the point? Isn't part of AB supposed to be overload?

 

[cseggleton]

well of course boy is their most cohesive album since they had 18 years to work on it!! bad joke