Would You Rather Have The New Album... - Page 4 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Your Blue Room > Everything You Know Is Wrong > Where The Album Has A Name - Songs of Experience
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 03-28-2011, 10:26 AM   #46
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 59,913
Local Time: 02:00 PM
if you name it punch and pie, people will buy it.
__________________

Headache in a Suitcase is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2011, 09:30 PM   #47
Acrobat
 
patternshirt170's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Long Branch, NJ
Posts: 396
Local Time: 07:00 PM
and a free hat...
__________________

patternshirt170 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2011, 07:04 PM   #48
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Jive Turkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,646
Local Time: 01:00 PM
That one only works if you simply say "Free Hat"
Jive Turkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2011, 12:46 PM   #49
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Rachel D.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: At the Lettuce Bar
Posts: 6,100
Local Time: 01:00 PM
There is no "new album" anymore. But, yes, I would rather have a new album.
Rachel D. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2011, 05:52 PM   #50
Blue Crack Addict
 
flybabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sunglasses,USA
Posts: 17,056
Local Time: 02:00 PM
I love ATYCLB and HTDAAB for different reasons. And they aren't what you would call mainstream but they weren't classics either. I'm still betting on U2 to pull something creative out of their hat. They've run the show long enough to know where it's at, and we could stand to see something from U2 that could be considered a classic.
flybabe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2011, 09:57 PM   #51
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
trevgreg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Minnesota, USA
Posts: 3,591
Local Time: 01:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMacPhisto View Post
On the one hand, those three albums could have enough U2 classics to equal a whole record of awesomeness, perhaps...on the other hand, we're due for another masterpiece methinks. To get one this late in the game would truly be
There's your answer. If it were me, I'd probably go for the three albums if I was guaranteed to love at least 4 songs off each them. Yet again, people's personal tastes are so subjective that they might not like the "masterpiece" stuff anyway, so it's a tricky question for that reason too.
trevgreg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2011, 03:47 PM   #52
The Male
 
LemonMelon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Hollywoo
Posts: 66,312
Local Time: 11:00 AM
What the hell are U2's weaker albums? Wait, don't answer that, or we'll never emerge.

Because of the subjectivity of music, it would be a safer bet to take the three albums.
__________________


Now.
LemonMelon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2011, 07:33 PM   #53
War Child
 
clifedge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: MD
Posts: 926
Local Time: 01:00 PM
I would rather wait four years (or even five or six) if it meant U2 producing another album that meant as much as JT or AB. I definitely prefer quality over quantity.

Don't think it will happen though.
clifedge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2011, 10:02 AM   #54
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
God Part III's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Denmark
Posts: 4,335
Local Time: 07:00 PM
Just give me everything they did in the last 5 years.

I want the proposed Songs of Ascent, the Danger Mouse thing, the Red.One thing, and, especially, alternates, early versions and outtakes from No Line On The Horizon.

I don't care how good it is. I like everything they've ever put out in some shape or form. I'm convinced I'll like at least half of this anyway.
God Part III is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2011, 01:00 PM   #55
New Yorker
 
gman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Highlands of Scotland
Posts: 2,570
Local Time: 06:00 PM
quality over quantity every time. That sed....how spoilt are we, when most of us can say....even with u2's less popular offerings....we can still really enjoy them
gman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2011, 01:40 PM   #56
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
AnCatKatie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: pearl jammin'
Posts: 6,876
Local Time: 11:00 AM
All the 'great' albums involved much experimentation. They've experimented so much I have no idea how they could do something so 'new' we'd think it was 'great'.

I'm going for wanting them having something soon, though. I need to be able to do more concert-going while I'm at college, dammit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chocky View Post
So if I got 3 albums that equalled October, Zooropa & HTDAAB (for instance) instead of one AB or JT, I'd be quite happy.
Considering there's fine material on all of those, whether the album as a whole is good or not, agreed.
AnCatKatie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2011, 05:21 PM   #57
War Child
 
The Panther's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Posts: 949
Local Time: 03:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by patternshirt170 View Post
Infact age means nothing, Lou Reed made New York when he was 48 he then jumped right into a record with John Cale, Songs For Drella and a third about the death of two of his friends = a rich three year period. Bowie's Heathen/Reality phase, he was around 55 at the time.. both of these periods for the artists in question featured sparse touring and albums that followed each other within 14months..
I take your point, but you have to think of it the larger context. Like, in 50 years, when we're reading the "History of Rock'n'roll" book, is the introduction to the Lou Reed article going to say, "American singer/songwriter who made Songs for Drella"? I don't think so; it's going to say he was in the Velvet Underground and wrote 'Walk on the Wild Side'. Likewise, nobody in 50 years is going to care about Heathen/Reality in comparison to 'Space Oddity' and Ziggy Stardust and Heroes, etc.

So, yeah, it needn't be about age... except it almost always is.


Quote:
Originally Posted by patternshirt170 View Post
As for the no tour option; the best example is still R.E.M with Out Of Time and 12 months later Automatic For The People, huge, huge sellers with zero mega tour..
That's true, but that strange R.E.M. situation occurred (a) when R.E.M.s' mode of music (college rock, indie-rock) was just hitting a mainstream mass audience, and (b) R.E.M. were still young then. Neither of these situations would apply to U2 now.
The Panther is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2011, 05:25 PM   #58
War Child
 
The Panther's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Posts: 949
Local Time: 03:00 AM
To the question of the thread, I would rather U2 -- and all financially well-off groups -- entirely forego both big tours and "albums as events". The idea of the corporate album which we'll release with fanfare and then sell to a mass audience via corporate tours is getting out-dated, for me. 'Albums' as such are already kind of gone as having any cultural significance. So, why not just release tracks on their website? If they have to release any album, I'd certainly rather have quantity at this point, not necessarily quality (although preferably both).
The Panther is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-08-2011, 03:40 PM   #59
The Male
 
LemonMelon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Hollywoo
Posts: 66,312
Local Time: 11:00 AM
U2 won't go the digital route because a large chunk of their fanbase still imagines the internet as a series of tubes.

Besides, U2 still enjoys the concept of the album as a collection of songs that share themes and cohere in order to create a listenable whole. The band works best within these parameters also...think TUF, Joshua Tree, Achtung Baby, etc. They tend to be a far poorer band when it's just a bunch of songs stapled together, and they're not exactly known for great one-off singles.
__________________


Now.
LemonMelon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2011, 11:16 PM   #60
War Child
 
The Panther's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Posts: 949
Local Time: 03:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LemonMelon View Post
U2 won't go the digital route because a large chunk of their fanbase still imagines the internet as a series of tubes.

Besides, U2 still enjoys the concept of the album as a collection of songs that share themes and cohere in order to create a listenable whole. The band works best within these parameters also...think TUF, Joshua Tree, Achtung Baby, etc. They tend to be a far poorer band when it's just a bunch of songs stapled together, and they're not exactly known for great one-off singles.
I'd say "fine" to this if U2 actually released more than one LP every 6 years. But they don't! For me, NLOTH is a very incoherent collection of bad-to-great songs. In other words, it's a bunch of one-offs packaged together as an album. Given the choice between 11 of those tracks every six years, and 40 of those tracks in the same time frame, I'll take the 40!

(I do realize, however, that opinions might be different on this if you think NLOTH is some kind of masterpiece.)
__________________

The Panther is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:00 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com