So will we ever hear Tripoli or Every Breaking Wave?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
debatable. I can't listen to it start to finish. There are 3, maybe 4 songs i can genuinely listen to all the way through.

Interesting is an interesting word too, because it definately is weird, strange, more out there than anything this decade, but in my opinion only Miss Sarajevo and Your Blue Room would even be considered close to ANYTHING else released in this decade.

Interesting means what it should mean in this context. I simply find it more intriguing and replayable from start to finish than ATYCLB or HTDAAB. This does not, however, mean that it's better song-for-song.
 
Interesting means what it should mean in this context. I simply find it more intriguing and replayable from start to finish than ATYCLB or HTDAAB. This does not, however, mean that it's better song-for-song.

Fair point, and you are entitled to make it.

I completely disagree though :wink:
 
Also, it appears to me that those who dislike Passengers are more inclined to categorize and sweep it under the rug. A logical reaction, but it sort of bothers me because U2 (well, 3 out of 4 members) are not ashamed of the album at all. They just released it the way they did to be fair to the fans.

Just an observation.
 
agreed, but whether its semantics or not, it goes a fair way to proving my point that passengers isn't a U2 album: it is an album featuring U2

Who cares at all if it's a U2 album or not? That's beside the point. The real point here is that it's material that U2 put their efforts toward and released, and that we as U2 fans listen to and reflect on (sometimes as vigorously as with any other U2 record). It's composed of songs that should be included when talking about the catalogue of 90s U2.
 
Also, it appears to me that those who dislike Passengers are more inclined to categorize and sweep it under the rug. A logical reaction, but it sort of bothers me because U2 (well, 3 out of 4 members) are not ashamed of the album at all. They just released it the way they did to be fair to the fans.

Just an observation.

I would agree with that. I have given it numerous chances, because aside from passengers, I could barely name a U2 song I don't like. Its not that i dont like experimental music, or that i don't liek Eno, I just never 'got it'. It was left-field, which is great, but there were no great tunes, it was just too eclectic for me, and I probably haven't worked hard enough to let it in
 
As I always say, it’s not U2 because… it’s not U2. But it sits on my shelf where it absolutely belongs – right in between Zooropa and Pop.

They didn’t go in there to record a weird side project, they went in there just to muck around much like they did for Zooropa. They had a buzz in their head, and they went in to muck around with it. And much like Zooropa they had no idea what they were doing as it was going. Album? EP? Something else? Shits and giggles? I believe the debate over what to call it came up late in the game. It clearly isn’t a U2 album in that they clearly couldn’t have released it under the U2 name. They got that. I get that. I personally would have loved them to have the balls to do that, but they would have been crucified. If they were a 30% smaller band, they could have, but U-fucking-2 (in big lights and fireworks going off) couldn’t do it. You couldn’t have U2 drop a new album with all of that hype - which, even if they did their absolute best to minimize it, it would still absolutely be there - and then hand the world United Colours. So… that mixed with the extended nature of the group created the new name.

It does though perfectly fit after Zooropa and before Pop. It makes perfect sense. They add the groove on Achtung, they explore it further in it’s more natural electro setting on Zooropa, then they almost wholly hand themselves over to the beeps and tweeks on Passengers before reigning it all back into one on their most guitar heavy and electronically bedded album, Pop, kind of tying Achtung and Passengers together (in a very dark room under a very chaotic city). They went on a run and they were just smart enough to know that a certain % of the fanbase would have had a heart attack upon them reaching one extreme end of it. A lot of people hated Zooropa already, and afterwards, plenty hated Pop, so you can imagine the reaction if Passengers were U2 – Passengers. They made the right decision, but it doesn’t negate what is on that disc, how it came about and where it absolutely fits.

Also, it’s not like they’re not happy to mix the two. The Miss Sarajevo CD single featured One live + a song called Bottoms, which was just an electronic, funkier version of Zoo Station (minus vocals). They do Miss Sarajevo live, they feature it on U2 compilations. It’s not a U2 album, but it’s part of U2’s story and definitely part of their, ahem, ‘musical journey’.
 
As I always say, it’s not U2 because… it’s not U2. But it sits on my shelf where it absolutely belongs – right in between Zooropa and Pop.

They didn’t go in there to record a weird side project, they went in there just to muck around much like they did for Zooropa. They had a buzz in their head, and they went in to muck around with it. And much like Zooropa they had no idea what they were doing as it was going. Album? EP? Something else? Shits and giggles? I believe the debate over what to call it came up late in the game. It clearly isn’t a U2 album in that they clearly couldn’t have released it under the U2 name. They got that. I get that. I personally would have loved them to have the balls to do that, but they would have been crucified. If they were a 30% smaller band, they could have, but U-fucking-2 (in big lights and fireworks going off) couldn’t do it. You couldn’t have U2 drop a new album with all of that hype - which, even if they did their absolute best to minimize it, it would still absolutely be there - and then hand the world United Colours. So… that mixed with the extended nature of the group created the new name.

It does though perfectly fit after Zooropa and before Pop. It makes perfect sense. They add the groove on Achtung, they explore it further in it’s more natural electro setting on Zooropa, then they almost wholly hand themselves over to the beeps and tweeks on Passengers before reigning it all back into one on their most guitar heavy and electronically bedded album, Pop, kind of tying Achtung and Passengers together (in a very dark room under a very chaotic city). They went on a run and they were just smart enough to know that a certain % of the fanbase would have had a heart attack upon them reaching one extreme end of it. A lot of people hated Zooropa already, and afterwards, plenty hated Pop, so you can imagine the reaction if Passengers were U2 – Passengers. They made the right decision, but it doesn’t negate what is on that disc, how it came about and where it absolutely fits.

Also, it’s not like they’re not happy to mix the two. The Miss Sarajevo CD single featured One live + a song called Bottoms, which was just an electronic, funkier version of Zoo Station (minus vocals). They do Miss Sarajevo live, they feature it on U2 compilations. It’s not a U2 album, but it’s part of U2’s story and definitely part of their, ahem, ‘musical journey’.

Bravo, and well played Sir :applaud:
 
Also, in regards to a 2nd album, they are doing this tour a little differently are they not? I haven’t followed tour talk at all (because let’s face it, it never begins to get even remotely interesting for us in the Southern Hemisphere for at least 12 months anyway) but they’re starting off in Euro stadiums over summer, no? So I assume into US arenas later in the year (too late for stadiums)?

They normally take it for a couple of spins around each continent and already hitting up the US so far after the album release is already perhaps a bit of a setback for them, so by the time a 2nd round comes about (US stadiums in 2010 spring/summer?) the collective A.D.D of you Americans should have well and truly kicked in… they’ll need something else. Hopefully though not something they feel they need to tailor a bit more to the US market (The Rubin stuff? Sounded very… Bomb-like).
 
To be honest, I was really disappointed that Every Breaking Wave didn't make the cut.
It sounded like the most interesting track (to me) in there. I hope it'll make a B-Side or something, but I'm not holding my breath.
 
It's interesting how always the not released tracks seem to be the most interesting ones.

I liked what I read about Every Breaking Wave, especially the title, but I have no idea how the song would have really sounded. So maybe it didn't fit on the album and they decided against releasing it. It will surface sooner or later. We don't know how many more songs U2 have finished and not put on the album, there are certainly some great songs there as well.

I'm pretty positive that Tripoli turned into F-BB.
 
I would love to be proved wrong, but I think you're way off base here.

They've been saying they're going to release a new album quickly for the last ten years....and it doesn't happen.

Come on man, they've got families and such........


How am I way off base?

I think my assumption actually has a lot of merit based on recent band quotes in interviews. I can't remember them mentioning that they had enough material for another album already, which they wanted to get out as soon as possible during previous album releases.
 
It's interesting how always the not released tracks seem to be the most interesting ones.

I liked what I read about Every Breaking Wave, especially the title, but I have no idea how the song would have really sounded. So maybe it didn't fit on the album and they decided against releasing it. It will surface sooner or later. We don't know how many more songs U2 have finished and not put on the album, there are certainly some great songs there as well.

I'm pretty positive that Tripoli turned into F-BB.

I have always thought this as well. Those of us here who regularly visit this site often talk alot about songs that weren't released or left off the album. There are several reasons to love/ be interested in these songs. I think we were spoiled by the bands willingness to release (almost) everything from the Joshua Tree era. Songs that didn't fit or haven't been quite as polished show the bands interesting creative process. Staying with the Joshua Tree, doesn't it seem quite amazing that a song like "race against time" and "sweetest thing" came out of the same creative period? I think I look for the extremes from each album to see what the limits of the band were. In achtung for example, you have the extremes of 'she's gonna blow your house down' and 'heaven and hell". Now I am not saying that these songs should be on the album (respectively) but I enjoying hearing the bands creative process just as much as anyone. So to get back to Every breaking Wave, I hope we get to hear it sometime...maybe it was like Mercy :reject: in that for what ever reason it didn't fit (are you gonna wait forever, summer rain, always, levitate, etc.) I think the song could have been a bit too pop, I thought I read somewhere that it was popish-kind of like sweetest thing for JT.

just some thoughts
 
Every Breaking Wave?

So what happened to or became of this tune? I was reading the Q article and they describe it as if it were part of the album...the only track that they dont mention (that is now officially on the record) is Fez-Being Born. I dont think that Wave and Fez are one in the same...
 
Maybe not finished in time...

It will go to the same place as:

Super City Mania
Bulldozer
Love is all we have left

The amount of unfinished, or even finished songs they have must be immense.
 
Yes, but they will be released exclusively in The Even More Complete U2 on iTunes and you will have to buy everything U2 has ever done AGAIN to hear them.

But you'll get 50 bucks off if you buy a U2 iPhone.

And who is gonna buy 150-80 dollars worth of iTunes cards as an alternative? :crack: I might,if I actually could afford that :lmao:
 
Back
Top Bottom