Should U2 Remaster An Album
- Thread starter ZeroDude
- 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.
Liesje
Blue Crack Addict
No, why?
Hoodlem
War Child
I think its a great idea...those albums need it badly.
the only thing is, if they remaster a good album then people will either say its not as good as the original (probably the same people that refuse to accept that any film sequel is as good as the original, and that U2 peaked back in the 80s and are never coming back, and that the red hot chillis suck now and their "old stuff" is much better...) well, you get the idea.
People will also say they are going back to the glory days (and this infers they arent so good now)
If they do a 'bad' album (pop, being unfinished and not as much liked as their other albums, springs to mind) then I think thats a good idea, but lots of people will see at as an admission that their "new stuff" sucks.
Sorry to say that although I would like them to finish off pop, a lot of people will look at it very negatively
People will also say they are going back to the glory days (and this infers they arent so good now)
If they do a 'bad' album (pop, being unfinished and not as much liked as their other albums, springs to mind) then I think thats a good idea, but lots of people will see at as an admission that their "new stuff" sucks.
Sorry to say that although I would like them to finish off pop, a lot of people will look at it very negatively
Niceman
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
I'd rather hear new material, but maybe a disc of new versions of songs from their whole career would be interresting.
yertle-the-turtle
ONE love, blood, life
They could remaster their back catalogue, plonk an extra disc of bonus tracks, double the price, no, quadruple the price, and let us buy them like sheeeeeeeeeeeep.
Baa.
Edit: Alright that could start a lot of arguments, but anyway, um, I don't really care if they did any remastering unless they put out something extra. The early albums sound fine to me.
Baa.
Edit: Alright that could start a lot of arguments, but anyway, um, I don't really care if they did any remastering unless they put out something extra. The early albums sound fine to me.
Last edited:
yertle-the-turtle said:They could remaster their back catalogue, plonk an extra disc of bonus tracks, double the price, no, quadruple the price, and let us buy them like sheeeeeeeeeeeep.
Baa.
Edit: Alright that could start a lot of arguments, but anyway, um, I don't really care if they did any remastering unless they put out something extra. Most of the early albums sound fine to me.
And it would happen
neutral
genius of compression, Forum Moderator
War, UF and JT have already been remastered...
Shade
Acrobat
neutral said:
They were remastered, but not using technology currently available. They're now almost as dated as the originals. They're also in such limited supply that it's hard to get one without paying at least $30 for it, and sometimes upwards of $50. What U2 needs to do is remaster their entire catalogue the way Peter Gabriel did in 2002. I would gladly pay to replace my now-old-and-scratchy U2 CDs I've been listening to since the late '80s and early '90s if the new discs sounded as amazing as the PG remasters.
Last edited:
Aardvark747
Blue Crack Addict
Id like to hear how the band sound if they re-recorded POP in full...
phommel
Refugee
P O P
manwiththespinninhead
The Fly
i have a remastered version of jt , and i would love to see achtung baby re-mastered.
Needle_Chill
War Child
I need an UF remastered version...
There is such potential for the sound on that album, but it just doesn't transfer well to CD. UF is so spacey and ambient, like Zooropa, it deserves better quality.
There is such potential for the sound on that album, but it just doesn't transfer well to CD. UF is so spacey and ambient, like Zooropa, it deserves better quality.
Needle_Chill
War Child
BTW, I know it's out there, I just need to get my hands on it...
chocky
Refugee
Simple Minds re-mastered their entire catalogue but didn't add anything (no b-sides, demos etc). I'd be TOTALLY against U2 doing that because you just KNOW that 2 years later they will get re-released with all bells and whistles and we're up for double the cost.
But bands like the Cure and Manic Street Preachers released damn fine anniversay re-masters in the past month.
The Cure's "3 Imaginary Boys" was re-released for its 25 year anniversary and went from an 11 track raw album to a 30 track cracker with lots of demos/outtakes/b-sides etc.
Manic Street Preachers "Holy Bible" album was released as a great 10th anniversary package containing 2 different re-mastered versions of the LP plus demos, outtakes, sessions etc AND a DVD with live performances of the album tracks on TV shows and concerts. A lot of effort obviously went into it.
THAT'S what U2 should be doing. Quantity AND quality.
But bands like the Cure and Manic Street Preachers released damn fine anniversay re-masters in the past month.
The Cure's "3 Imaginary Boys" was re-released for its 25 year anniversary and went from an 11 track raw album to a 30 track cracker with lots of demos/outtakes/b-sides etc.
Manic Street Preachers "Holy Bible" album was released as a great 10th anniversary package containing 2 different re-mastered versions of the LP plus demos, outtakes, sessions etc AND a DVD with live performances of the album tracks on TV shows and concerts. A lot of effort obviously went into it.
THAT'S what U2 should be doing. Quantity AND quality.
phanan
Blue Crack Addict
U2 definitely need to go back and remaster their albums from the 80s and early 90s. The sound quality is so inferior to how some other remasters sound. Someone mentioned Peter Gabriel - excellent example. His CDs sound incredible now!
I think some people responded to this post thinking the subject was re-recording or remixing the albums, which is totally different. I want the CDs remastered, but in their original forms. This isn't about going back and redoing Pop (although that would be an idea)...
I think some people responded to this post thinking the subject was re-recording or remixing the albums, which is totally different. I want the CDs remastered, but in their original forms. This isn't about going back and redoing Pop (although that would be an idea)...
the tourist
Blue Crack Addict
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2003
- Messages
- 27,919
Let Larry have his way with POP.
Rono
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
No remastered cd please. Every cd represent the timeperiode they recorded in ( including the technical stuff they used )
Aardvark747
Blue Crack Addict
the tourist said:
...and his way with Passengers
HTDAAB out to be remastered from ground up. I mean, how could such a great album be so badly mixed together? Crumbs, an altogether outstanding song can't be played at all without either a) killing your tweeters (and grinding your teeth on the sssss's) or, b) turning the equipment on flat settings. I hate flat tones, but seriously, I can't play this album with the treble/bass levels I want to. To muck it up further, after ABOY (another super fab piece by the how), where you flip up the bass, you've got to reverse the settings for the next song - AMAAW - or, you blow out your subs. Altogether, I vote that they remaster this album immediately because it's a shame that such an outstanding album has such crappy mixing.
Reggie Thee Dog
Blue Crack Addict
I vote for the Remasters. I love the repackaged stuff. I agree if U2 were to do it throw in the B-sides and new booklets (with lyrics for the older albums). That'd be cool...huh, huh, huh, huh, huh....
