Why did Bono lie about this being a long album?
- Thread starter Muldfeld
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
last unicorn
Blue Crack Addict
Absolutely. He came to this forum and decided to do everything to upset the fans.
Interesting, when I was watching tha 60 minutes interview with Chris Martin Sunday, he showed the bands rules about recording an album and one of them was the album couldn't be more than 42 minutes long and 9 songs.
I wonder if this is the next hot topic.
I wonder if this is the next hot topic.
cdirani
War Child
PowerSurge
New Yorker
this.
Salome
you are what you is
this forum needs more smilies and less drugs
last unicorn
Blue Crack Addict
^ Well, we need the right drugs.
Oh, that's interesting. Still, I expected "Rattle and Hum" lengths. At least 70 minutes.
Don't get me started on that. The most recent episode had apparently 40+ minutes of stuff cut out including lots of stuff with Baltar and Romo. I'm livid about that, too, especially since David Eick had promised fans doubly long episodes. If it makes people feel better, I've been badgering Ron Moore about ensuring we get extended episodes on the DVDs!
I guess he wanted to say the album will be long...awaited.
But he chopped off the last word
Ha, ha. Welcome, by the way.
Exactly! However, what if he meant that it FEELS very long...
Seriously, though, there's hyperbole and then there's just misleading and not thinking at all. Obviously U2 fans were going to compare running times to previous U2 albums.
30-some minute running times for bands like The Strokes and Vampire Weekend don't count; they're more the exception than the rule, and they would even consider their albums short.because if you think that over 50 minutes isnt a long album, you have no idea what long is.
Average albums these days start with a 3.
Why did he lie? What a dumb thread
Traditionally, in the '70s, albums could not exceed 45 or 50 minutes. It's now the era of the CD so that makes Bono's comments doubly annoying. I wanted him to double my pleasure!
I just hope these bonus tracks are divided. Nothing more annoying than fast-forwarding 10 minutes to hear something or having to rerecord the album on a blank CD to accommodate this.
ozeeko
Refugee
ya think the last 3 albums (including this one) featured 11 tracks because of a subconscious wish on their parts to top or at least equal the quality of The Joshua Tree, the last album b4 ATYCLB that had 11 songs and won them Grammy of the Year? Huh? Coiincidence?
if i had a stick i'd hit you with it.
elevated_u2_fan
Blue Crack Supplier
these threads are getting stupider by the day...
Irishteen
Blue Crack Addict
Nothing wrong with a long album if it's consistent
Although the only 70+ album that comes to mind as being completely consistent is Disintegration
Tyagu_Anaykus
New Yorker
brilliant Nothing wrong with a long album if it's consistent
Although the only 70+ album that comes to mind as being completely consistent is Disintegration
Oh, the problem is not the albums, it's me. I usually get bored by long albums, even if they're good. They gotta be great, awesome to grab my attention all the way until the end. Examples: R&H, Exile on Main St. (which is 67 min long), Chinese Democracy...
Gonna Run 2 U
New Yorker
Every Breaking Wave and Tripoli (if no Fez-Being Born) were cut after he said that.
Irishteen
Blue Crack Addict
I generally don't mind long albums, seeing as I usually sit around listening to music forever
Oh and I forgot () by Sigur Rós that's over 70 minutes and is perfect too
So yeah the more the better in my opinion, as long as the more doesn't suck. But I'm happy enough with what we have 52-53 minutes
We also get to hear NLOTH 2 on Friday
LarryMullen's POPAngel
Blue Crack Distributor
I generally don't mind long albums, seeing as I usually sit around listening to music forever
We also get to hear NLOTH 2 on Friday
hhahahaha, I do the same... but like I said, listen to music on your pc is a curse, it's too easy to change the song... then, I usually skip or go listen to another band after 50-60 minutes...
Oh, friday
... and NLOTH is the song I'm expecting the most...
rattle and hum doesn't really count. take away the live cuts and the excerpts and the album is just under 40 minutes long.
Irishteen
Blue Crack Addict
And sounds twice as good
because if you think that over 50 minutes isnt a long album, you have no idea what long is.
Average albums these days start with a 3.
Why did he lie? What a dumb thread
Not All of them, Metallica's Death Magnetic is about 74:41, Chinese Democracy is 71:18. Line could end up being over 60 minutes if you include the iTunes bonus tracks, hopefully they aren't remixes of No Line On The Horizon or something like that, but new tracks.
Well, that's true... but then there's no kicking ass Helter Skelter, Silver and Gold, Bullet the Blue Sky and the more important....
NO FREEDOM FOR MY PEOPLE...
Ah, and in case I wasn't clear R&H, Exile and Chinese are albums that I like a lot and that are near the 70 min mark
Maybe Bono meant long in terms of Cylon time. Seriously dude, if you think 53 minutes isn't a long album, you should listen to more music.
And why do you always have to start redundant threads? Give that ego a break and try posting in existing threads. Do you really think this topic hasn't already been discussed ad nauseum considering that 1) Bono's comment is really old (and possibly incorrectly quoted and 2) the album length has been known for weeks?
coemgen
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Why would you care about this? So what? There's 11 new songs. That's all that matters.
Galeongirl
Galeonbroad
Acrobat08
Acrobat
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2008
- Messages
- 356
Why so concerned with length? I thought size didn't matter, it's how you use it.
Similar threads
- Locked
