New Album Plan (Hypothetical)

[dan_smee]

So how does this sound to you all?

Assuming there will be a new album based on the Danger Mouse sessions, and assuming U2 wig out like they always do and want to re-work things, I propose the following:

Album is release as a double disc.

Tight 10-11 song set that contains the best 10-11 songs from the DM sessions in their original form.

Disc 2 is all of the same songs, but with full treatments based on the source tapes by Declan Gaffney (Fish Out of Water). Think the EBTTRT, Crazy Tonight and Boots mixes of recent acclaim.

A single is selected based on the strongest song factoring in both versions, and BOTH are released to radio. Same for any subsequent singles.

Us err on the side of playing the DM versions live, however, if a song is considerably better in the FOOW form, it get s a Crazy Tonight style live treatment.

Halfway through the tour, an EP is released based on the other sessions in recent times (best track or two from RedOne, SOA etc). This is a 6-7 track EP that will rejuvenate the live show in a similar way to the 2010 Europe leg, but with official releases, and more songs in the rotation to warrant the extra US leg/s.

I think this will satisfy U2’s indecisiveness, their need to re-think and question themselves, but also the fans want for a more unpolished, raw and interesting sound.

 

[djerdap]

I really hope something like this won't happen. One studio version is enough.

 

[subnet]

i think a single, double, triple, quadruple disc and box set is most likely in the works, along with various itunes, target, and amazon specific content. in terms of alternate cuts, i could do without.

 

[GirlsAloudFan]

I don't give a shit about remixes. No thanks.

 

[God Part III]

That's a great idea. U2 remixes have gotten better over the years (just think Justice's Boots, Mark Knight's MOS or the new EBTTRT) and I would prefer a U2 trying something new than ATYCLB part 4 (perhaps a bit unfair to NLOTH, I love that album, but not as revolutionary as I'd hoped).

I'd rather seem them fail in a grand experiment than win doing the same old thing they've done for years. I'm sure I'll love the music in either case, though.

 

[lov12113]

I think it's safe to say that U2 shy away from double or triple albums. They originally "planned" a double album for Joshua Tree and decided against it, and they were also toying with the idea of a double album for No Line and decided against that. U2 is a single album kinda band it seems. (Though I would love a double album as a fan)

 

[the tourist]

I'd love it if they just gave the tapes to both Danger Mouse and someone unexpected like Dave Fridmann and released two separate albums based on the same original tapes. And, of course, give absolute control to those two guys and let them do whatever the hell they want with the tapes.

 

[The_acrobat]

Release the Danger Mouse album as the next album, and then release SOA as a bonus 2nd disc. They obviously chickened out due to it's lack of commercial appeal. So why not just put it out there for the fans? This way, they won't have to worry about it's lack of commercial appeal, as everybody will be paying attention to the Danger Mouse album.

 

[djerdap]

There is no SOA. Why do some people here still think there was an album of complete songs ready for release? This was debunked by Adam Clayton in one interview, and downplayed by the other band members in about dozen of other interviews.

Some folks really need to learn how to see through Bono's bullshit.

 

[dan_smee]

Just so there's no misunderstanding - I'm not talking about remixes in the same sense that every song of the 90's got a Perfecto mix - I am talking about using the source tapes, pieces recorded and cut from the final etc to totally rebuild the song in someone elses creative context.

I think Gaffney did a fantastic job with EBTTRT and Boots / CT. Really talented ear for music, and it is definately not the mindless thumping remix that is so commonly mistaken for the reworked song.

I am talking much closer to album cuts, produced by someone who has a great ear for these things.

 

[digitize]

Just release something.

 

[lemonfly]

I think most fans would prefer a second disc of original material (even if it's quite average) than comprising of re-imagined/alternate versions of the same fucking songs on the first disc. They could make a bumper edition and throw everything in there, but if they ever go the double album route I'd want two discs of new songs dammit

 

[Niceman]

If they do two discs, I hope they do two discs of original material. If they have compelling remixes, that's what B-sides are for.

 

[purpleoscar]

I want U2's next album to sound so different it requires massive brain rewiring of U2 fans to get it.

 

[djerdap]

Just so there's no misunderstanding - I'm not talking about remixes in the same sense that every song of the 90's got a Perfecto mix - I am talking about using the source tapes, pieces recorded and cut from the final etc to totally rebuild the song in someone elses creative context.

I think Gaffney did a fantastic job with EBTTRT and Boots / CT. Really talented ear for music, and it is definately not the mindless thumping remix that is so commonly mistaken for the reworked song.

I am talking much closer to album cuts, produced by someone who has a great ear for these things.

I realise this is what you were thinking, and I believe this would be a terrible compromise to make. It's better to stick with one and only studio version in my mind.

 

[dazzledbylight]

love the mouse pad!

they could challenge themselves by releasing a double album of original material... as lou reed would say ..." ...let me dream if I want to..."....

c'mon, guys- i darez U!

 

[Shawn Bonneau]

If you wand two discs, how about an acoustic second disc like Dashboard Confessional did?

 

[Rafiennes]

just gimme SONGS!
not remixes of songs.

And gimme b-sides!
not remixes of songs passing as b-sides.

 

[adam3000]

I think it's safe to say that U2 shy away from double or triple albums. They originally "planned" a double album for Joshua Tree and decided against it, and they were also toying with the idea of a double album for No Line and decided against that. U2 is a single album kinda band it seems. (Though I would love a double album as a fan)

As a fan, I'd love a double album.

But for quality control, U2 will never do it. And the albums are probably better for it.

Even though I'm loving listening to all the extra Achtung Baby B-sides, baby versions, bootlegs, etc. They refine their albums until they have the best 10-11 cuts they can get at the time. Like refined gold. It makes a stronger effort than spreading your focus to 20+ songs.

12 more months to go ... new U2 album!

 

[LarryMullenFan]

I really hope it's not going to be anyting like Dan pictures. All these mixes, alternate takes.. To me, they're signs that the band really is indecisive about the direction they want to go.
I just hope for a coherent studio album. I guess they'll release it in a normal jewel box, a superdeluxe box set, ultra superdeluxe boxset and mega ultra fan only collectable limited edition boxset. The latter is bound to contain a disc with some alternate takes that are somehow always more interesting than the final album cut.

 

[Gonna Run 2 U]

The only thing I would like them to do differently would be to make a longer album. Maybe 14-15 quality songs. 1 or 2 of those with some instrumental experimentation of some sort. I would be more than happy with that.

 

[PookaMacP]

Hmmm. I can see where you're coming from, but I'm not sure I'd be too happy about it. Too indecisive. (Though it would fuel thousands of EYKIW discussions along the lines of NLOTH 1 -v- NLOTH 2.)

Nor would I like a double album, because it would inevitably be a sprawling mess.

Ten songs, no filler. Is that too much to ask for?

Spoiler

Probably

 

[djerdap]

Ten good songs, no filler. Is that too much to ask for?

Most definitely.

 

[Niceman]

If U2 ever did do a double album, I imagine it would have some instrumental and moody pieces mixed in, which I would love. With 24 songs, there's no reason to have 24 singles, and no hope that you'll play even half of it live, so there's space to be creative for the albums own sake.

 

[Zooropa man]

Have them sequestered in the studio (with D.M.). Do NOT let them out UNTIL they decide on the top 20 songs (Yes, 20! - screw 11), 15 would make the final album; and have them work on those until the end of this year and release an album WITH B-Sides in the spring 2013. BOOM!

 

[wolbersu2]

Double album is more relevant now than it ever was. Surprise us U2

 

[djerdap]

Double album is more relevant now than it ever was.

An album has never been less relevant than today, let alone a double album.

 

[silkensky]

We need an awesome lead single. One that can impress both the fans and the masses.

 

[Niceman]

An album has never been less relevant than today, let alone a double album.

It would mean more to me now than ever. U2 still hasn't done their White Album. Maybe it's time?

 

[djerdap]

I'd be happy if U2 did their Yellow Submarine at this point.