OFFICIAL - New Album Delayed Until 2009

[LastNameonEarth]

It's very feasible that the band played the tracks back and are unhappy with a couple. I don't see how that's out of this world. They are perfectionists. I wish they would just say fuck it, it's great, but you know they will look for anything to fix until they think it's perfect. They don't want to have to look back with regret- which they do with Pop- because they think they could have made it better. Staring at the Sun they said they desperately wished they could have had another month with to turn into an all time classic or something like that. That was just three albums ago. I think it's likely that they would go back and do something like that than release it unprepared again. But that's just me.

And yet the original version of Staring at the Sun was better than the "new mix" on the Best Of

If they weren't happy with a couple of the tracks, would they not be calling Lanois and Eno back in to work on it as well? Have there been any suggestions of this since Lanois said it was done back in June?

 

[BoyOnTheHorizon]

Sorry for being repetitive, but all of this is boring, boring, boring...

I hope they (U2, their managment and their record label) realise this and throw us some crumbs... like official info.

Some names, or maybe some lyrics... am i asking too much????????/

 

[bram]

It's very feasible that the band played the tracks back and are unhappy with a couple. I don't see how that's out of this world. They are perfectionists. I wish they would just say fuck it, it's great, but you know they will look for anything to fix until they think it's perfect. They don't want to have to look back with regret- which they do with Pop- because they think they could have made it better. Staring at the Sun they said they desperately wished they could have had another month with to turn into an all time classic or something like that. That was just three albums ago. I think it's likely that they would go back and do something like that than release it unprepared again. But that's just me.

I think this is a plausible scenario--especially with U2. Unfortunately, it would imply they think they are missing a certain-sounding song...which they will probably artificially manufacture to fill this "hole" in the album.

 

[Roland of Gilead]

If I were a lady, I'd wear panties. And right about now, they wouldn't be in a crunch at all. It is still a long way to Sept. 30th.

 

[BoyOnTheHorizon]

And yet the original version of Staring at the Sun was better than the "new mix" on the Best Of

If they weren't happy with a couple of the tracks, would they not be calling Lanois and Eno back in to work on it as well? Have there been any suggestions of this since Lanois said it was done back in June?

I agree, original Staring at the sun was much better. Although Discotheque was not... the Best of version was awsome!

 

[popacrobat]

And yet the original version of Staring at the Sun was better than the "new mix" on the Best Of

If they weren't happy with a couple of the tracks, would they not be calling Lanois and Eno back in to work on it as well? Have there been any suggestions of this since Lanois said it was done back in June?

having a new mix does not mean they had extra time to work on it. i think that's a pretty poor misconception around here. with the new mix, its still the same song. same lyric. basically same everything. who knows if they had 30 days to work on staring at the sun what the finished product could have been. I think it's a great song, but the band wished they had more time to work on it. the new mix on the best of is not indicative of what the band thought it could be if they had another month to work on it. nobody will ever know.

 

[LemonMelon]

I think the piece that's fucking up the whole puzzle is the Edge Q interview. That's largely due to the lack of information given about when the interview was taken, when the article itself was written, and so on. I am of the opinion that the interview was taken around July 15th or so, some time before the track listing was finalized, while the article itself was written 2-3 weeks ago, some time before the recent Bloc Party album was released. Whether or not the editorial comments take into account any recent information, such as the confirmed finalization of the NLOTH video, is unspecified. Because it's a magazine, the concept of time is lost, and I maintain that any comments in it, though perhaps entirely valid, should not be taken as gospel.

 

[bram]

Sorry for being repetitive, but all of this is boring, boring, boring...

I hope they (U2, their managment and their record label) realise this and throw us some crumbs... like official info.

Some names, or maybe some lyrics... am i asking too much????????/

Since you are asking U2 fans, I would say YES, yes you are asking too much.

 

[mikal]

1) I mentioned that I would concede this point. But we're not even 2 weeks behind schedule yet. And that album was "finished" and then they got an entire year to redo it...so unsurprising that it was in the can and completely ready for announcing a little earlier. And it is at least plausible that U2 would go for more of a surprise approach, particularly post-In Rainbows (Bono applauded them for what they did).

2) If Edge said that it could be 2009, why wasn't he quoted in the article? There is no way to know how or why that information was included, or if it has any solid reasoning behind it. And as has been discussed ad nauseum, this was a very old interview...probably even before they went ahead with the music video shoot.

3) Latest @U2 report provides nothing to go on. I guess it's really just a matter of opinion how much (if any) weight you want to give to what boils down to another ambiguous and sourceless quote (as compared to the numerous reported quotes about fall/Nov 2008).

4) Jamming along with the song does not mean it isn't finished...just like singing along with the song doesn't mean its not finished. And given Bono's musical abilities...I mean, really, need I say more?

5) The 2006 clips were complete-sounding as you say, but they were just trying to capture some ideas that they had been coming up with while on tour (remember Edge talking about how much he/they were writing on Vertigo tour?). But they weren't in full-fledged album-making mode like everyone knows they are now. The clips sound finished to me, and--again--we have heard from multiple sources this summer that they are indeed finished OR in the mixing stage. Even Edge's new quote (his ACTUAL quote) implies that they are in song-selection/tracklist-picking mode. Which ties right back to my original point--there is no way that tracklisting is keeping them from releasing the album before Xmas. It's gotta be something bigger. Which also does not make sense.

hey, if my points mean absolutely nothing to you, then good for you. i normally look at the positive side of things too, but something about all of this just gives me a very bad feeling.

i just hope you're not crushed if the band does indeed decide to push the album back.

 

[bram]

Sorry for being repetitive, but all of this is boring, boring, boring...

I hope they (U2, their managment and their record label) realise this and throw us some crumbs... like official info.

Some names, or maybe some lyrics... am i asking too much????????/

And you are lucky if you are bored. Most of us are anxious as hell about whether we are seeing this new album in a just a few weeks or many months.

 

[BoyOnTheHorizon]

Since you are asking U2 fans, I would say YES, yes you are asking too much.

Why ??Why???

I had enough. I'm joining a Killers thread. Bye! See you when the album comes out

 

[BoyOnTheHorizon]

Just kidding

 

[LemonMelon]

Sorry for being repetitive, but all of this is boring, boring, boring...

I hope they (U2, their managment and their record label) realise this and throw us some crumbs... like official info.

Some names, or maybe some lyrics... am i asking too much????????/

Are you serious? There have been like 6 track names confirmed by band members.

 

[bathiu]

when they were working with Chris Thomas, were there any rumours about the possible release date (like nov 2003)? before they started to rework Bomb?

 

[bram]

hey, if my points mean absolutely nothing to you, then good for you. i normally look at the positive side of things too, but something about all of this just gives me a very bad feeling.

i just hope you're not crushed if the band does indeed decide to push the album back.

Why would they mean nothing to me? Just because I addressed alternate possibilities for each point? Wasn't that the whole point of discussing the issue?

I actually really appreciated the fact that you gave me the full list of reasoning because I wanted to know if I was missing anything. And its fine if those reasons lead you to believe something differently. I guess I'd still like to hear a response to what I said, but no big deal. And yes, I will be crushed if the band decides to push the album back--but not because I was "proved wrong" but simply because I want to hear the new album as soon as possible. And again, I think its unfair to dismiss my points as over-optimistic when they seem completely reasonable and even likely to many (if not most) people who have been following the album process.

 

[mikal]

when they were working with Chris Thomas, were there any rumours about the possible release date (like nov 2003)? before they started to rework Bomb?

the big rumor was "Solar" to be released in Spring 2004. there were some song titles floating around too. to be honest, it reminds me a lot of where we are right now, minus the beach clips and a little more info and speculation.

 

[LastNameonEarth]

having a new mix does not mean they had extra time to work on it. i think that's a pretty poor misconception around here. with the new mix, its still the same song. same lyric. basically same everything. who knows if they had 30 days to work on staring at the sun what the finished product could have been. I think it's a great song, but the band wished they had more time to work on it. the new mix on the best of is not indicative of what the band thought it could be if they had another month to work on it. nobody will ever know.

Well, maybe, guess we'll never know.

BoTH - Since some people on here believe The Slow Loris to be Bono (or at least another band member), here's a lyric he's given us:

"Sun, the moon, the stars"

I hope that has whet your appetite

 

[popacrobat]

when they were working with Chris Thomas, were there any rumours about the possible release date (like nov 2003)? before they started to rework Bomb?

yes. the infamous "Solar" and "Winter" albums. But there was nothing ever concrete about that. We had a couple bits of information like the "Full Metal Jacket " (eventually Vertigo), etc.

 

[LemonMelon]

when they were working with Chris Thomas, were there any rumours about the possible release date (like nov 2003)? before they started to rework Bomb?

Rumors that were about as good as the 2009 rumors are now. There was no discussion of a tour, no beach clips, no dates as specific as November 18, 2008, no confirmations of a finished music video for the first single, nothing.

Plus, U2 already went through their Chris Thomas phase with Rick Rubin.

 

[bram]

And yet the original version of Staring at the Sun was better than the "new mix" on the Best Of

If they weren't happy with a couple of the tracks, would they not be calling Lanois and Eno back in to work on it as well? Have there been any suggestions of this since Lanois said it was done back in June?

And this is a good point. If its not done...then what are they doing about it? If nothing, then why?

 

[BoyOnTheHorizon]

Are you serious? There have been like 6 track names confirmed by band members.

I want to see some headlines on the front page of Rollingstone.com:

U2 reveals details about new album!

New single out september 20th.

This is official!

 

[mikal]

Why would they mean nothing to me? Just because I addressed alternate possibilities for each point? Wasn't that the whole point of discussing the issue?

I actually really appreciated the fact that you gave me the full list of reasoning because I wanted to know if I was missing anything. And its fine if those reasons lead you to believe something differently. I guess I'd still like to hear a response to what I said, but no big deal. And yes, I will be crushed if the band decides to push the album back--but not because I was "proved wrong" but simply because I want to hear the new album as soon as possible. And again, I think its unfair to dismiss my points as over-optimistic when they seem completely reasonable and even likely to many (if not most) people who have been following the album process.

maybe "mean nothing to you" came out wrong. i meant more that we obviously don't see eye to eye and that you're taking the positive/emotional approach here. there's nothing wrong with that and i'm not insulting or dismissing your opinion. it's just obvious that we don't see eye to eye.

what i think you're missing is that i'm not out to "prove you wrong", i'm just giving my opinion based on the information i've been presented.

 

[popacrobat]

Rumors that were about as good as the 2009 rumors are now. There was no discussion of a tour, no beach clips, no dates as specific as November 18, 2008, no confirmations of a finished music video for the first single, nothing.

Plus, U2 already went through their Chris Thomas phase with Rick Rubin.

to be fair, theres no reason to think the video is finished. they were just taking shots of Cadiz i think and U2 were going to be screened into it somehow? filming in London or something. I never heard anything to come out of the London bit.

 

[the tourist]

I want to see some headlines on the front page of Rollingstone.com:

U2 reveals details about new album!

New single out september 20th.

This is official!

 

[bram]

I want to see some headlines on the front page of Rollingstone.com:

U2 reveals details about new album!

New single out september 20th.

This is official!

You're just being silly. What's the difference between RS and Q magazine??

 

[vaz02]

I want to cry

 

[the tourist]

You're just being silly. What's the difference between RS and Q magazine??

 

[LemonMelon]

I want to see some headlines on the front page of Rollingstone.com:

U2 reveals details about new album!

New single out september 20th.

This is official!

Hahaha....Bono's "most complete and radical album" quote was published in Rolling Stone. Just FYI.

And whether you want to believe it or not, those titles are confirmed by the people who made the songs. That's pretty good for the moment.

 

[bram]

maybe "mean nothing to you" came out wrong. i meant more that we obviously don't see eye to eye and that you're taking the positive/emotional approach here. there's nothing wrong with that and i'm not insulting or dismissing your opinion. it's just obvious that we don't see eye to eye.

what i think you're missing is that i'm not out to "prove you wrong", i'm just giving my opinion based on the information i've been presented.

Yeah, I think it's definitely fair that we're seeing the opposite side of the coin of this issue. But I don't understand why my side (the positive) has to be the "emotional" side. To me it obviously seems to be the most reasonable, rational, and logical.

Perhaps "prove wrong" was the wrong expression, but not exactly inappropriate considering that you thought I would be more disappointed if there was no 2008 album than someone who believes that it probably won't come out in 2008.

 

[bathiu]

the big rumor was "Solar" to be released in Spring 2004. there were some song titles floating around too. to be honest, it reminds me a lot of where we are right now, minus the beach clips and a little more info and speculation.

minus the video for NLOTH/first single and u2.com clips

Plus, U2 already went through their Chris Thomas phase with Rick Rubin.

that's what I was thinking too