Rolling Stone: "U2 greatest hits comp, may drop before Christmas"

[Aygo]

I agree. I think these guys will be making records for a while. I think those who say they only have a short time left are looking more at their age and thinking that, rather than looking at the band's real desire. Even through having kids, getting engaged (i.e., Adam), working on tons of extra-curriculars, etc., every band member has continued to talk about wanting to make more music.

Yeah, I think you're right, it can be quite possible, unless they do not become another self-tribute band (as Rolling Stones)...
Look at Madonna (for instance). That bitch (not in a depreciative way ) is almost turning 50, she still selling millions, making worldwide #1 hits (US excluded, naturally), still provoking polemics and controversy, she still hot with a big physical presence and everybody still listens to her music (even if you detest her...).
I think U2 can still be around here in the next 10 years in the same way if they still keep pushing themselves or find several and different ways to promote themselves and make people keep on listening their music.

 

[Kildare]

I agree. I think these guys will be making records for a while. I think those who say they only have a short time left are looking more at their age and thinking that, rather than looking at the band's real desire. Even through having kids, getting engaged (i.e., Adam), working on tons of extra-curriculars, etc., every band member has continued to talk about wanting to make more music.

Yeah. Everything we know about these guys seems to suggest that they aren't going to give up the spotlight without a fight. U2 has been their entire lives and it seems like even today they feel like they have something to prove. They want to blow people away by making quality music far longer than anyone would think possible.

 

[vaz02]

i sleep better knowing u2 will give up the crown than loose it.

 

[Earnie Shavers]

The key to how long they do this, or what form they do it in, rests entirely with Bono.
I don't think they'll quit any time soon, but I think they might plateau from here on, which to me means they may as well give it up. I sincerely hope not though. If the next album is more of the same, they're dead and buried.

 

[Aygo]

^ Well, as we all know, when the press and the critics get tired of an artist or when they think that the artist is getting to much spotlight, the natural reaction from these institutions is to start a kind of bash and negative reviews about him and his current work even if he's making a good job and even if his last album is very good.
It already happened by the Rattle And Hum era and sort of by the Pop era (mostly in the US, they never were badly received in Europe...).
I wouldn't be surprised if the next work or releasements of the band would be followed by not-so-good reviews and kind of bash speak about the band's last actions
But I agree with Earnie Shavers when he says that it seems that U2 has always something (new) to prove to the world's eyes. I don't think they'll give up from that task this soon, not at all...

 

[Screwtape2]

Does anyone else think the band won't retire for another 10 years or so? It seems like a lot of people think its one more album and tour then out.

To me at least, it feels like the band isn't concentrating on the music as much. They all have families and other interests. Edge doesn't seem to experiment as much anymore which is his choice. Bono's lyrics don't seem as strong. I think in a couple of years, Larry will start anchoring the band and Bono's activism will have taken him further away from the music. The group has two more albums left at best.

 

[vaz02]

The group has two more albums left at best.

agreed , and i think a best of is included in that 2 albums too.

 

[Screwtape2]

agreed , and i think a best of is included in that 2 albums too.

Yeah, I'm thinking one last studio album. I can't see them doing more than one world tour. I mean, they have to be feeling the heat from some of the other artists out there. Between the book, the Sydney DVD, and this GH album they have to be thinking about thier legacy alot. A new album next year plus say a two years on tour, that would put them at 2010. They will probably call it a day at that point.

 

[gherman]

What if U2 kept making albums but didn't try to be such a marketing force with their music? Would they be bashed so much? What if they get away from "trying" so hard to be cool and relevant?

 

[Earnie Shavers]

I'm just talking about the music, the 10-12 tracks on each album. I don't give a fuck about the marketing/promotion. That's all fine and good. The weakness that could either end them soon or have them plateau for a while is all in the music. Once U2 aren't an evolutionary band, they are 95% dead, but that 5% can still sell shitloads and may do so for another 2 decades to come.

 

[LMP]

Maybe they can do a cover of Free Love Freeway?

Free love on the free love freeway,
The love is free and the freeway's long.
I got some hot love on the hotlove highway,
I ain't going home cos' my baby's gone.



In all seriousness, I see the guys making 2 more albums, and probably tour. Hopefully a tour reminiscent of R.E.M.'s tour after their Greatest Hits '88 - '03 rolled around.

 

[MaxFisher]

Free Love Freeway



A long time later I see a cowboy crying
"Hey buddy, what can I do?"
He says, "I lived a good life, had about a thousand women,"
I said, "Why the tears?",
he says, "Cause none of them was you".

Tim: "What you?"
David: "No, he's looking at a photograph."
Tim: "Of you?"
David: "No, of his girlfriend. The video would show it."
Tim: "Sorry. Just sounds a bit gay at the moment."
David: (looks at camera) "Not gay."

 

[Iskra]

Why is it the band continues to talk about making new music yet people on this board continue to say every album is the last. People said Joshua tree was it and that was almost 20 years ago.
Wake up people.
For Godsakes, they are building a NEW recording studio.
Would you build a new house if you had a week to live?

 

[Screwtape2]

Would you build a new house if you had a week to live?

It's called a legacy. It's a gift in the future for other aspiring Irish musicians.

 

[Axver]

It's called a legacy. It's a gift in the future for other aspiring Irish musicians.

Where did you drag that one from? The band has rather explicitly stated that the studio's for them to use.

But this forum is always a hotbed of "U2 will retire at x-point in time". It's like eschatology, really, where people always try to predict when the world will end; they're always wrong.

 

[Screwtape2]

Where did you drag that one from? The band has rather explicitly stated that the studio's for them to use.

That's why I said "in the future." After U2 is gone the studio will probably be used by other Irish musicians. It's like Apple Studios, The Beatles knew other artists would use it in the future when they built it. Like The Beatles, U2 will probably allow other people to use the studio. The band has always helped Irish musicians, so you know they will share it with those musicians at some point.

 

[Earnie Shavers]

For the record, I don't think there's any evidence to suggest U2 will stop recording any time soon. They could easily record 10 albums of Bomb quality in 10 years if they so felt like it. I'm just suggesting that if they indeed are hitting a point of cruising in one place, they may as well give it up.

 

[Axver]

That's why I said "in the future." After U2 is gone the studio will probably be used by other Irish musicians. It's like Apple Studios, The Beatles knew other artists would use it in the future when they built it. Like The Beatles, U2 will probably allow other people to use the studio. The band has always helped Irish musicians, so you know they will share it with those musicians at some point.

Ah, right, I agree with that.

 

[tpsglick2424]

For the record, I don't think there's any evidence to suggest U2 will stop recording any time soon. They could easily record 10 albums of Bomb quality in 10 years if they so felt like it. I'm just suggesting that if they indeed are hitting a point of cruising in one place, they may as well give it up.

 

[Earnie Shavers]

Do you need that explained?

 

[Lemonfix]

Honestly...I don't see any band that still gets along well, has all their members healthy, and has a large fan base (plus interest from the general public) ever retiring. U2 may take many years off while their kids are growing up but I doubt they will ever stop recording officially.

 

[U2dork]

Why is it that whenever the band releases anything new, the doomsday-ers come out and start predicting when and how the band will cease to exist? I've seen it happen with each new release for over a decade now.

Did anybody read the Marc Marot interview link I posted a while back? The band is not going away anytime soon.

 

[An Cat Gav]

i agree with you U2dork, the band will be around for a while.
The thing that worries me though and others I think, is that Bono appears to be focusing a lot of his energy on not only his "good deeds" etc but also his outside business interests. If another G Hits package is coming out then this will make me worry that his eye wont be on the ball when it comes to making music and it may indeed no longer be his number 1 priority. A brand new album would allay a lot of fears that I'm sure many of us have.

 

[Peter]

If they are going to build a new U2 Tower annex studio in Dublin, why would they quit?

 

[guill]

Did anybody read the Marc Marot interview link I posted a while back? The band is not going away anytime soon.

So, when a U2 fan asks -- you know, people are always worried, "Are they gonna call it quits soon?" and somebody says, "No, they have X amount of albums left." To your understanding, and I know it's been a few years, how many albums are left on the deal?

I don't know, Matt. I would imagine [pauses]...at least another three...I think. And I think there may even -- dependent on how well the two Best Ofs did -- there may even be a right for Island to have a combined Best Of. Because obviously they did the '80s and then they did the '90s.

A combined Best Of combining what kind of stuff?

Everything! Anything from any point in their career. That's certainly not on the schedule. It's not on the agenda for the moment, but there just happens to be a clause somewhere in the contract that allows them to do it.

http://www.atu2.com/news/article.src?ID=4274

 

[Tyagu_Anaykus]

Would a combined Best of make sense? I mean I guess they've made two best of because the amount of great songs they have in their catalog. Maybe I'm wrong, I'm just saying.
A combined Best of would require to some great songs to be left over...

 

[Bonochick]

A combined Best of would require to some great songs to be left over...

Many argue that that already happened with the two Best Ofs that were already released. No matter what songs they put out, people will find fault and feel that some stellar songs were excluded.

 

[Tyagu_Anaykus]

Yes I know ( I still can't believe The fly was left out), What I meant was what would be the pourpose of a combined Best of? Just to sell?

 

[Tyagu_Anaykus]

please understand I'm not bashing. this is just a conversation

 

[ponkine]

To me at least, it feels like the band isn't concentrating on the music as much. They all have families and other interests. Edge doesn't seem to experiment as much anymore which is his choice. Bono's lyrics don't seem as strong. I think in a couple of years, Larry will start anchoring the band and Bono's activism will have taken him further away from the music. The group has two more albums left at best.

100% agree with the post

Also I don't understand why some friends here think that releasing Box Sets, Anthologies, etc is equal to be finished as band. The only one way to be finished as a band is losing the relevance and albums quality. U2 have been doing wrong for years, wih lesser quality albums and increased lack of quality on songwriting, singles, lyrics, etc, etc.

When a band is going downhill as U2, you have 3 choices:

Keep the trend (sadly, U2 are doing that )
Dream it all up again
Definitely split up

I can imagine the music without U2. Sooner or later the band will broke up, and we'll have to accept that.
Nowadays everytime I think in these men getting older and colder, The Who's statement comes to mind "better die before get old". U2 have done excellent music for years, they proved the world they were the best already, so why keep going like a kinda by act, showing pass their prime with every new year?. I really don't understand that. They have enough money to make at least 3 generations from their families rich and comfortable.

If The Beatles wouldn't have broke up in 1970 and they were keep going in the 70s until Lennon's shot dead in 1980, I bet you they were nowhere near as legendary as they still are, and they relevance would be not even half of what actually is.