Sam O Sullivan: album in 2008

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

U2girl

Blue Crack Addict
Joined
Sep 28, 2000
Messages
21,111
Location
slovenija
People from U2Valencia.com, as U2place.com reports, met the drum tech Sam O Sullivan in Dublin. He says U2 has no plans, at least at the moment, to enter the studio in the coming months, and that the talk now is new album 2008, and a tour in 2009.
 
U2girl said:
People from U2Valencia.com, as U2place.com reports, met the drum tech Sam O Sullivan in Dublin. He says U2 has no plans, at least at the moment, to enter the studio in the coming months, and that the talk now is new album 2008, and a tour in 2009.

Shocking! :wink: Still, internet fan sites reporting. But at least they are quoting a very credible source. :hmm: I wonder what people were predicting this time frame all along................. :wink:
 
What else is new?
Anyone REALLY believed they will release an album this year?
 
Nope. I would be leaning more towards 2009 before we get a album. So it looks like another 4 year wait between albums.

I hope the band does something. Won't we get the IMAX show sometime this year?
 
Well you two may have thought that but I communicated this very time frame many times on this forum and quite a few people jumped down my throat for it. Called me a pessimist. No, realistic.
 
Well, maybe we wouldn't be hoping - no one claimed for sure - for 2007 if McGuiness, after Hawaii show, hadn't said they plan a 2007 album and 2008 tour. Also Edge has said they don't want to spend too much time on this one, which is plausible after the much laboured last three albums. (both of which I found more credible than Larry's "see you soon" comment or Bono's hype) Also, Rubin doesn't seem like a producer willing to spend years and years on an album.

:madspit: I still think that's pessimistic and that is just one source.

Maybe the song writing and entering studio later approach Rubin requested from them is taking longer than they thought?
 
I think that Rubin wants nearly finished songs before sitting down to produce them. This gives the band some time to put together some songs for him....which they will no doubt tear down and build up again when recording...:shrug:
 
Edge is getting about as bad as Bono is when trying to get a timeframe out of the band.

The last album we were told they didn't want to make us wait so long. They've said similar things after this tour.

I think if they are going to use Rubin, they will work on the songs themselves, which may take over a year. The actual recording with Rubin wouldn't take more than a month or two. I can't see him putting up with a Streets type recording session.
 
well after they get in the studio later this year, it should take about 12 months before they wear out rubin like they wore out chris thomas. once rubin gives up on them, eno should be ready to join them again. by this time, it will be 2010, and eno will have already had 2 coldplay albums under his belt.

is that too pessimistic ?
 
As long as they don't scrap the sessions entirely and start over mid-way through with a new producer, I expect it to be out by 2008 at the very latest. :up:
 
Rubin is not the kind of producer that likes to wait a lot for the job to be done. Remember that he works with several artists/bands at the same time. The man will started to get pissed off if U2 takes much time to work on a bunch of new songs...
 
U2girl said:
Well, maybe we wouldn't be hoping - no one claimed for sure - for 2007 if McGuiness, after Hawaii show, hadn't said they plan a 2007 album and 2008 tour. Also Edge has said they don't want to spend too much time on this one, which is plausible after the much laboured last three albums. (both of which I found more credible than Larry's "see you soon" comment or Bono's hype) Also, Rubin doesn't seem like a producer willing to spend years and years on an album.

:madspit: I still think that's pessimistic and that is just one source.

Maybe the song writing and entering studio later approach Rubin requested from them is taking longer than they thought?

I love it. People were ready to jump on the bandwagon even before the McGuiness quote in Honolulu when the same type internet fan sites indicate new album 2007 by a single report. Now a fan site reporting from a very credible source reports conflicting information to that, and its not to be believed, because it doesnt fit what you want to happen andits only one site?? :huh: A bit of hypocrisy to me.

This time frame fits the template U2 works with and always has. That is what I have kept saying it. Sam is Larry's tech in the studio also. If they havent requested him and have no plans to in the near future for him (which he would know about) we are nowhere near a new album. Also, is Rubin confirmed for sure for the next album? I know its been brought up in some articles but I havent seen anyplace with any type of legitimacy that has indicated he is producing the next album for sure. All I have read is that its a possibility.

How is it pessimistic when I would prefer they tour in 2009 anyway? Not only does it fit U2's template for albums and touring, it fits mine as well! :lol:
 
Blue Room said:

This time frame fits the template U2 works with and always has.

It only took them 4 years to finish an album ONCE. ONCE, DAMMIT. :banghead: And that was only because they changed producers halfway through the sessions and tossed what they had. :| I don't know how this incorrect information is lodged in so many member's heads now.

Zooropa--->PASSENGERS--->Pop 2 years between each
Pop--->ATYCLB 3 1/2 years
ATYCLB--->HTDAAB 4 years

The average length between U2 albums is 2.083 years. Look it up.
 
Last edited:
LemonMelon said:


It only took them 4 years to finish an album ONCE. ONCE, DAMMIT. :banghead: And that was only because they changed producers halfway through the sessions and tossed what they had. :| I don't know how this incorrect information is lodged in so many member's heads now.


:yes: I don't care if people think it'll be 2007 or 2008, but it does get old to see this notion tossed around as fact all the time. If you don't count Passengers, it's taken them 4 years only twice. If you do count Passengers (yes, for one more time--we should indeed count it, for not only are all 4 u2 members involved, but they probably would've created their post-Zooropa album sooner than 1997 had they not done Passengers...), then they only took 4 years once. Not much of a pattern.


Back to fighting over this year vs. next........
:wink:
 
LemonMelon said:


It only took them 4 years to finish an album ONCE. ONCE, DAMMIT. :banghead: And that was only because they changed producers halfway through the sessions and tossed what they had. :| I don't know how this incorrect information is lodged in so many member's heads now.

Thats not what I'm saying. I'm saying it fits the time frame for the end of tour up until the next album/tour. I dont know how that isnt getting through to you to be honest.

Zoo TV tour ends 1993
Pop album 1997
Popmart tour 1997/1998 (4 years since they were on tour)
ATYCLB Late 2000
Elevation 2001 (3 years since they were on tour)
Bomb 2004
Vertigo tour 2005/2006 (3.5 years since they were last on tour)

So, if you go by the shortest time between tours over the last 15 years you are looking at a 3 year gap in between. This tour ended 2006, 3 years puts it to 2009. :shrug: Its to soon for them to hit the road again in 2008 when they just finished (it doesnt matter that they had a short break, they still worked for half of it). They typically take a year after each tour to decompress as Edge describes it. Then get to work again in some fashion.

Also factor in that they almost always shoot for a late fall release with a tour to follow the next spring (Even Pop/Popmart was suppose to work this way, Pop was due out in October 1996 and that was their plan originally). It takes alot of time, money and effort by not only U2 but everyone in their organization for promotion of a new album and planning a major tour. They JUST shut that machine down 2 months ago. I just cant see it starting up again in 8 months. Now if they dont plan to tour for the next album (which I think is SUPER unlikely) then all bets are off. A new album could happen more quickly. I'm just factoring in everything involved with the big picture.
 
Last edited:
The Beatles also quit touring. Which is a major difference. U2's tours are a major reason it takes them longer to get a new album out. They also dont work the same way the Beatles did. Every artist is different. So I dont understand why that comparison was even brought into this discussion.
 
Last edited:
Blue Room said:


Thats not what I'm saying. I'm saying it fits the time frame for the end of tour up until the next album/tour. I dont know how that isnt getting through to you to be honest.

Zoo TV tour ends 1993
Pop album 1997
Popmart tour 1997/1998 (4 years since they were on tour)
ATYCLB Late 2000
Elevation 2001 (3 years since they were on tour)
Bomb 2004
Vertigo tour 2005/2006 (3.5 years since they were last on tour)

So, if you go by the shortest time between tours over the last 15 years you are looking at a 3 year gap in between. This tour ended 2006, 3 years puts it to 2009. :shrug: Its to soon for them to hit the road again in 2008 when they just finished (it doesnt matter that they had a short break, they still worked for half of it). They typically take a year after each tour to decompress as Edge describes it. Then get to work again in some fashion.

Also factor in that they almost always shoot for a late fall release with a tour to follow the next spring (Even Pop/Popmart was suppose to work this way, Pop was due out in October 1996 and that was their plan originally). It takes alot of time, money and effort by not only U2 but everyone in their organization for promotion of a new album and planning a major tour. They JUST shut that machine down 2 months ago. I just cant see it starting up again in 8 months. Now if they dont plan to tour for the next album (which I think is SUPER unlikely) then all bets are off. A new album could happen more quickly. I'm just factoring in everything involved with the big picture.

Yeah, the tour would cause it to vary a bit. As for me, I'm not expecting as long of a tour as Vertigo...definitely shorter this time out. More like Elevation. I think Vertigo was far too long of a tour, and at this stage of a band's career, you'd think they would want to wind the touring down a bit and focus on their craft. :hmm:

I look at it this way:

The average space between the last three albums is roughly three years, so, with that in mind, here's the scenarios for the album's release:

Miraculous case: May-August 2007
Best case: September-December 2007
Unlikely medium case: January-August 2008
Worst case: September-December 2008
Pessimistic/Just to stir up s*** case: 2009 or later
 
Miraculous case: Anytime in 2007
Realistic case: September-December 2008
Worst case: 2009 or later
 
Chizip said:
Worst case: 2009 or later

Can someone explain why this is realistically possible?

1. They have a producer.
2. They have songs written.
3. They want to get it done quickly.
4. It's never taken them any longer than 4 years to finish an album before, so there is zero precedence.

:shrug:
 
LemonMelon said:


Can someone explain why this is realistically possible?

1. They have a producer.
2. They have songs written.
3. They want to get it done quickly.
4. It's never taken them any longer than 4 years to finish an album before, so there is zero precedence.

:shrug:

Do we know for sure they have a producer? Alot points to Rubin at this point, but has that been confirmed as a for sure thing? I havent read the Q article so I dont know if Rubin confirmed it as for sure. I dont think U2 has confirmed it though from what I have read. Not sure how they could though when it doesnt sound like they have a firm date when they are even heading back into the studio.

I do think 2009 for a new album is unlikely. The only way it would take that long is if some unforseen event took place in the bands personal lives that caused a delay in recording. OR if whoever the new producer is doesnt work out and they just start over. I would agree that both of those scenarios are worst case though.

I guess I'm not sure why 2008 is so bad. We had activity with U2 up until this past December. Even a new song last year. Waiting 2 years isnt that long of time really. Plus we have the IMAX movie to look forward to in the interim. Like I said before, I actually consider it best case scenario. Gives them plenty of time to do whatever they want with the next album and not rush.
 
Last edited:
LemonMelon said:


Can someone explain why this is realistically possible?

1. They have a producer.
2. They have songs written.
3. They want to get it done quickly.
4. It's never taken them any longer than 4 years to finish an album before, so there is zero precedence.

:shrug:

How many songs do they have written and 'ready' to record?
None of us know but I'd guess less than 5.
Rubin wants them to have the songs written before he starts recording with them.


Sure it's possible. Look at release dates relative to when the tour ends. ZooTv-POP 3 years, 3 months. POPMart-ATYCLB 2 years, 7 months. Elevation-HTDAAB 2 years 11 months. That's an average of 35 months (basically 3 years). 3 years from the end of Vertigo is December 2009. I think Edge's comments mean, we don't want to take 2 to 2 and a half years to write and record an album, rather maybe a year and a half. Even then, it could be 2009.

If I take an objective look, removing any cynicism, I am going to say to take a year to record an album worth of songs (maybe 13-15, with a few not making the cut) is defintely a safe, optimistic bet. If they enter the studio in March, that already places them at Spring next year, to begin recording. 4 or 5 months in the studio to record (roughly a song per week), is definitely on the optimistic end of a guess, you're looking at JUly or August before they even deliver the album to the label, two months to promote it (another optimistic guess) and you're looking at about October 2008 with about as idealistic as you could imagine.

Any hiccup would send it into 2009 with ease, absolutely relaistically possible.

That is unless anyone around here has the nerve to think U2 would take less than a year to record an album's worth of songs, it's taken them at least that long (Zooropa excepted) and well over since Achtung Baby. I think late 2008 is a good bet though, I think it's optimistic only because of all the snags they've run into in the past, they have to get a break once in a while.

I wouldn't even start worrying or dreaming about a possible release date until Rubin goes back into the studio with them.
At that point, 6 months from there I think would be a great scenario. The key will be how fast they write enough songs and feel confident enough to let loose of them, that's been their problem for 15 years.
 
Unless there's a whole new change in sound, I don't think waiting another 1 1/2 years would be worth it. :angry:
 
Blue Room said:


Do we know for sure they have a producer? Alot points to Rubin at this point, but has that been confirmed as a for sure thing? I havent read the Q article so I dont know if Rubin confirmed it as for sure. I dont think U2 has confirmed it though from what I have read. Not sure how they could though when it doesnt sound like they have a firm date when they are even heading back into the studio.

He said something to the effect of it being tentative.

They could use different producers to write and use Rubin to record. Wouldn't shock me if the Rubin thing didn't pan out.

They just get in the studio and spin wheels, even with prodcuers they are comfortable with. Are we supposed to believe it would be smoother with just some engineers, recording while they write? I think it could defintely be a collaborative effort and I'm not even sure Rubin would be down with that.

It's easy to be optimistic if you think U2 can change after all these years, I don't think they can change certain things about themselves, least of which the creative process itself. Right now, I'm betting against Rubin being the sole producer and I'm not sure if U2 can really jibe with him when it comes time to start getting real serious. Then again, U2 surely want to try things differently. It will depend on the quality of the songs they have brewing right now and how they stand the test of many overwrites and many overdubs.
 
U2DMfan said:


How many songs do they have written and 'ready' to record?
None of us know but I'd guess less than 5.
Rubin wants them to have the songs written before he starts recording with them.


Sure it's possible. Look at release dates relative to when the tour ends. ZooTv-POP 3 years, 3 months. POPMart-ATYCLB 2 years, 7 months. Elevation-HTDAAB 2 years 11 months. That's an average of 35 months (basically 3 years). 3 years from the end of Vertigo is December 2009. I think Edge's comments mean, we don't want to take 2 to 2 and a half years to write and record an album, rather maybe a year and a half. Even then, it could be 2009.

I heard 5-6 songs in December. :shrug: They wrote those between June and December, a month for each song. How much longer would it take them to write another 6? 6 months. That would put us around September. They record a little until December, get back into it in March. The songs have all been written and polished by then, and the recording process can be finished by July with no problems, they can have a single out in September, with an album in late 2008. And believe me, that's with a lot of padding. It doesn't take 6 months to write 6 songs, even for U2. Rubin could be in with the band as early as June if all things work out well, which means, who knows, the album could be nearing completion by December 2007.
 
Last edited:
LemonMelon said:


I heard 5-6 songs in December. :shrug: They wrote those between June and December, a month for each song. How much longer would it take them to write another 6? 6 months. That would put us around September. They record a little until December, get back into it in March. The songs have all been written and polished by then, and the recording process can be finished by July with no problems, they can have a single out in September, with an album in 2008. And believe me, that's with a lot of padding. It doesn't take 6 months to write 6 songs, even for U2. Rubin could be in with the band as early as June if all things work out well, which means, who knows, the album could be nearing completion by December 2007.

Yeah, but half or even most of those songs may not even make the cut for the next record. U2 records songs all the time. Even on the road during soundcheck. Most of them never make the cut or they take an idea from one and morph it into something else. But even that takes them alot of time.

I can see Rubin maybe coming in at the end and possibly doing some sort of co producer thing. My guess would be that they have someone assisting them in the studio up until that point. Flood? :yikes: :lol: But he is an engineer also.
 
Back
Top Bottom