U2 Multitracks

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

nextlife

The Fly
Joined
Sep 16, 2007
Messages
72
Does anybody have access to any of the multitracks from any of the U2 sessions?

I've just gotten my hands on a few of the beatles, queen, marvin gaye and a few other multitracks, and it would be great to get some U2
 
It's more of a tutorial, I like to see how they build and layer mixes. I don't use them in my own mixes, but I know a few guy's that sample parts of the drums.
 
It would be wonderful if U2 would release tracks for people to remix in Garageband format after each album has been out for a while. Trent Reznor does it with his NIN stuff and its fantastic fun being able to play with the various tracks.
 
ascender_RS said:
It would be wonderful if U2 would release tracks for people to remix in Garageband format after each album has been out for a while. Trent Reznor does it with his NIN stuff and its fantastic fun being able to play with the various tracks.

That would be pretty sweet. "Think the mixing sucks? Do it yourself!"
 
nextlife said:
Does anybody have access to any of the multitracks from any of the U2 sessions?

I've just gotten my hands on a few of the beatles

?!
 
Re: Re: U2 Multitracks

Multitracks is the flavour of the month

Everyone is talking about them on music and bands forums !

http://www.multitrackclassics.com/page/page/5155237.htm

I don't know how this started. It seems that one of the first multitracks revelead were 4 Sgt Pepper songs (Sgt Pepper's, With A Little Help From My Friends and A Day In The Life) on October 2007.

Ever since, everything has been crazy and exciting.

On January 2008, a guy named "poopchute" put the Killer Queen 24 tracks master on the queenzone forum. Immedialy the downloads collapsed every upload site.

On 02 February 2008 this guy put Bohemian Rhapsody 24 tracks master on the same forum. Soon afterwards the Queen's most appreciated collectors item ever was revealed to the world. There're several stories surrounding the adquisision of these unvaluable tapes (Berkeley students that were shown the Killer Queen multitrack tapes, etc)

Anyway, Queen fans are happiest than ever. It's a pretty ironic thing that a mysterious fan revealed the world that Brian May Stupidly, foolishly never was able to give. While the crappy QP releases has mantained the fans absolutely disappointed (and even annoyed, like the absolutely disposable and irritating re-re-re-re...release of Queen Montreal 1981) with the products, a fan made us happier in one week than QP in 10 years.

That's the reason why EMI and major labels are dying. They don't understand what releases like this would mean for us. Meanwhile they keep releasing the same s*** with nothing new to surprises us. The very best example is the Queen releases. The 2 DVD's edition with the second DVD being painfully short and filled with crap just to make it twice the price ... quite similar to U2 releases ...

Brian May has give no response for this, and I couldn't care less, honestly. What would he say?. I really hope he'll open his eyes and see what fans want *cough* 70s concerts on DVD *cough* the demo sessions *cough*

In short: OPEN THE VAULTS!


Now there're several multitracks around there. Not U2 yet, though.

This will revolutionize the music industry. So far, no official multitrack release by a band have been offered to the fans. But it's just matter of time. Trust me, this will be as cool as what Radiohead did last year

:drool:
 
Last edited:
Re: Re: Re: U2 Multitracks

ponkine said:
Multitracks is the flavour of the month

Everyone is talking about them on music and bands forums !

http://www.multitrackclassics.com/page/page/5155237.htm

I don't know how this started. It seems that one of the first multitracks revelead were 4 Sgt Pepper songs (Sgt Pepper's, With A Little Help From My Friends and A Day In The Life) on October 2007.

Ever since, everything has been crazy and exciting.

On January 2008, a guy named "poopchute" put the Killer Queen 24 tracks master on the queenzone forum. Immedialy the downloads collapsed every upload site.

On 02 February 2008 this guy put Bohemian Rhapsody 24 tracks master on the same forum. Soon afterwards the Queen's most appreciated collectors item ever was revealed to the world. There're several stories surrounding the adquisision of these unvaluable tapes (Berkeley students that were shown the Killer Queen multitrack tapes, etc)

Anyway, Queen fans are happiest than ever. It's a pretty ironic thing that a mysterious fan revealed the world that Brian May Stupidly, foolishly never was able to give. While the crappy QP releases has mantained the fans absolutely disappointed (and even annoyed, like the absolutely disposable and irritating re-re-re-re...release of Queen Montreal 1981) with the products, a fan made us happier in one week than QP in 10 years.

That's the reason why EMI and major labels are dying. They don't understand what releases like this would mean for us. Meanwhile they keep releasing the same s*** with nothing new to surprises us. The very best example is the Queen releases. The 2 DVD's edition with the second DVD being painfully short and filled with crap just to make it twice the price ... quite similar to U2 releases ...

Brian May has give no response for this, and I couldn't care less, honestly. What would he say?. I really hope he'll open his eyes and see what fans want *cough* 70s concerts on DVD *cough* the demo sessions *cough*

In short: OPEN THE VAULTS!


Now there're several multitracks around there. Not U2 yet, though.

This will revolutionize the music industry. So far, no official multitrack release by a band have been offered to the fans. But it's just matter of time. Trust me, this will be as cool as what Radiohead did last year

:drool:

Why the slight on Brian May or major labels, what the hell do they have to do with this? I would think the majority of artist wouldn't want their multitracks released like this.

Someone mentioned Reznor has released multi-tracks, I'm not sure how true that is or not...

But honestly, your post just comes off as being selfish and spoiled.
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: U2 Multitracks

BonoVoxSupastar said:


Why the slight on Brian May or major labels, what the hell do they have to do with this? I would think the majority of artist wouldn't want their multitracks released like this.

Someone mentioned Reznor has released multi-tracks, I'm not sure how true that is or not...

But honestly, your post just comes off as being selfish and spoiled.

i have to say i back you 100% there that really is over-reacting! Bands put out a record as it is, a lot of work goes into mixing them and there's no REAL reason for them to go and release all the multi-tracks except just to please a very small minority who take an interest in such a thing. Why are you getting cross at Brian May's 'laziness' or whatever you're insinuating? It's well within his right to be angry or however he's reacted to what's essentially theft and distribution of 'private' tapes not for public consumption.
 
Last edited:
Re: Re: Re: Re: U2 Multitracks

Someone mentioned Reznor has released multi-tracks, I'm not sure how true that is or not...

http://remix.nin.com/

This OFFICIAL NIN site has numerous multi-tracks that fans can download and remix, and then upload to the site. One fan's remix even ended up on NIN's newest remix CD.

He's very generous when it comes to this sort of thing. The remixes come in several formats, as well. He first did it with "The Hand That Feeds" a few years back, releasing the multitrack in a Garageband DMG (.exe for Macs, essentially). Demand was so high for other music software platforms that those versions soon followed.

You can be sure now :wink:
 
Oh, and U2 would never do that sort of thing. At least, I would never expect Paul McDollarBills to allow it in a million years.

Could you imagine being able to toy with POP and Zooropa tracks???? :drool:
 
This is a quite new concept idea.

Artist like Peter Gabriel, Brian Eno and others have offered some multitracked songs to be remixed.

In June 2006, Peter Gabriel and his Real World project launched an online competition: Shock The Monkey Remix.

http://www.businessweek.com/globalb...117320.htm?campaign_id=bier_inno.g3a.rss1018u

That was a powerful concept, and revolutionary too, in a very quiet way. But so far, there's no physical release of a complete album multitracked.

I can imagine Paul McDollarBills predictable reaction about all this multitrack discussion. "SHUT DOWN THE SITES, DELETE THE LINKS!". Many others managements would react like that. They don't really give a damn about fanbase - it really is all about protecting their own selfish self interests. They only can see limitations, not possibilities.

Can you dig it?

U2, Queen, Radiohead, Beatles, Floyd, Zeppelin (or the first major artist) could be THE piooners, the unconventionals, the first ones, the band that everyone would talk about, a la Radiohead 2007 with what they did on In Rainbows. Damn, that would be such a great feeling, and everyone would be proud of this band ahead of its time. They would make the trend. Everyone else would have no choice other than copy them.

When everyone will search wikipedia about the history of multitracked albums, U2 or the X major act will appear first. "in 2008 U2 pioneered the modern music by releasing the first multitracked album, the classic "Achtung Baby" (or UF, War, JT, etc. It must be a classic album, so the impact on the mass media will be shocking)

I'm not naive and I'm not a dreamer. Save this post if you want. Sooner or later a major artist will do this. Until that, every artist who is afraid of take risks won't do anything, used to follow the masses. But when that day comes, they will say "why on earth we didn't make it FIRST when we could!"

So, what now QP are doing is really silly.
These files have been around for YEARS before anyone here knew about their availability. If tracks like these multitracks are never realistically going to be available commercially, regardless of how many of us here download them, we are not affecting any profits for anyone elsewhere.

I'm not saying there isn't a bit of "Robin Hood" sense about all this. Every Queen fan who have the BR and KP multitrack feel poopchute is a hero. He beated all the big shots on the official Queen circles. They have the goods, they don't want to release.
These tracks are HISTORICAL RECORD and if the band can't be arsed to put them out, that's not fans problem.

They can't see what multitracks mean for fans: they are an absolutely fascinating glimpse into the genesis of two incredible songs, and they've only deepened the appreciation for the works.
Fans absolutely LOVE the multitracks, because they are closer to the songs in a way they never experienced before. Even without Pro-tools or a decent mixing studio, the possibilities are almost infinite. Just downloadi Cooledit or Audacity for free, and you'll be able to listen to all the tracks together or separately. You can do your own mixes, listen to details we never heared before. You can listen to the piano track only, to ge the right playing, etc. Suddenly fans have all the possibilites IN THEIR HOMES, and they don't have to be on their knees begging the music industry gods for a decent previously unreleased item.

I just have finished the 24 tracks master unedited mix with my crappy Audacity tools, and so what? I LOVED DOING IT!. I was free to do it, and it was the greatest feeling. Nobody told me what tracks parts of the song I'm allowed to hear and what I'm not.

For a while you're the producer of the song, you're the engineer. I don't care if I did it with the toy called Audacity. Nobody tells me what mix should I do and the way to do it. I experiment. Surely the results of any mix will be shite, but the feeling is absolutely incredible.


So, here's my suggestion for the music industry big shots: HERE'S A GOLDEN MINE. Be prepared and take notice that times are changing. This could save the death of music industry.

;)
 
Last edited:
ponkine said:


U2, Queen, Radiohead, Beatles, Floyd, Zeppelin (or the first major artist) could be THE piooners, the unconventionals, the first ones, the band that everyone would talk about, a la Radiohead 2007 with what they did on In Rainbows. Damn, that would be such a great feeling, and everyone would be proud of this band ahead of its time. They would make the trend. Everyone else would have no choice other than copy them.


What would there to be proud of? That they fulfilled a few selfish fan's dreams? They gave to the entitled?

What would be the point of recording anymore if now you release multitracks and 100 shitty remixes of every song starts getting spread about many under the original artist's name.

You would literally never get another Kid A again. No one would take the time to create these almost unrecognizable sounds and then show exactly how they did it, just so someone can tear it apart and rearrange it.

There is literally one of the dumbest things I've heard of and can't see anyone except the one off contest or something like said above.

That symbol with 'slave' written on his face would be rolling in his grave.
 
You just don't get it.

I don't understand you and I don't have to.

It's clear (outside your world) that the multitrack fever is spreading to all music forums and music fans.

Whether are you in or not, it's your problem. But don't tell me what is dumb and what not. I'm not alone with this.

Why on earth 15,000 + Queen fans have right now the "dumb" Bo Rhap multitracks.

Why on earth thousands are trying to get them ASAP?.

What if U2 decided to release multitracks?. Will still be "dumb"?

:|
 
ponkine said:
You just don't get it.

I don't understand you and I don't have to.

It's clear (outside your world) that the multitrack fever is spreading to all music forums and music fans.

Whether are you in or not, it's your problem. But don't tell me what is dumb and what not. I'm not alone with this.

Why on earth 15,000 + Queen fans have right now the "dumb" Bo Rhap multitracks.

Why on earth thousands are trying to get them ASAP?.

What if U2 decided to release multitracks?. Will still be "dumb"?

:|

Of course fans want them. Fans want everything(and usually for free). They want DVDs from every show, signed by the band, and shrink wrapped in the lead singers underwear. It doesn't mean that's what artist should be doing.

I understand that tons of fans want this, what's dumb is that they EXPECT it to be released by the artist.

You still haven't answered the question, why would the artist do this? You are only concerned about the fans perspective.
 
pacemaker said:


Except it's not a one off contest... it's thriving fan community.

Reread my post. I'm obviously talking about the artist. You won't find many artist in their right mind that would release their multitracks with the exception of a one off contest or so.

So, no it's not a thriving community of artist that will be this dumb.
 
I find it really hard to believe that you can take this "dumb" stance and be so serious about it. I understand not getting why fans think bands should cater to them in releasing these things. But to be honest, you're just being a downright stubborn dick about this all.

Who pissed in your cereal? People want multi tracks because they're passionate about the music and want to delve deeper into the process of creation. Isolating the harmonica track(s) on RTSS so you can hear Bono's breaths might really fascinate people.

I suppose releasing the Classic Albums Joshua Tree DVD, and others like it, is all for naught because its dumb of a band to give fans a glimpse of the way they work in the studio?

I'm surprised a musician as talented as you are, in the utter-fucking-crumbling industry that you're a part of, is opposed to new ideas when it comes to releasing music. I hope one day if you have fans as passionate about your music as U2, Queen, Peter Gabriel and Nine Inch Nails do, that you'll consider giving them something special from time to time, even if its as "dumb" as releasing multi track sessions of your songs.
 
pacemaker said:
I find it really hard to believe that you can take this "dumb" stance and be so serious about it. I understand not getting why fans think bands should cater to them in releasing these things. But to be honest, you're just being a downright stubborn dick about this all.

I'm sorry that you keep ignoring my point, but it's no reason to get personal.

pacemaker said:

Who pissed in your cereal? People want multi tracks because they're passionate about the music and want to delve deeper into the process of creation. Isolating the harmonica track(s) on RTSS so you can hear Bono's breaths might really fascinate people.

Reread my post again, because honestly you keep ignoring my point. I understand WHY fans would like them. But I have an even greater understanding of WHY this is a nightmare to most artists.

pacemaker said:

I suppose releasing the Classic Albums Joshua Tree DVD, and others like it, is all for naught because its dumb of a band to give fans a glimpse of the way they work in the studio?
I'm all for giving fans a glimpse into the studio, hell give them 24 hour webcam access, that's cool with me.

I'm not going to even touch the last part of your post for it's obvious to everyone that you don't get the point.

You don't release your multitracks, because you mixed and mastered for hours and hours in order for the public to hear it a certain way. Once you release your multitracks all that work is useless. You've open the door for anyone with a computer to remix your work, to remaster your work, so the internet and radiowaves are full with shit versions of your songs, but the majority of them will be out there with your name on it. If you access to the multitracks you could slightly remix and remaster any song of your choice, now what to stop radio from playing what the band thinks is a crap version?

The legal issues alone are an entirely different ballpark.

Believe me, most want multitracks so they can remix their fave songs not to hear a harmonica singled out.

Plus there will be hundreds of artists that would never want their music heard in it's rawest form, they don't want their mistakes amplified.

I'm not sure why this is so difficult for you to understand, this has nothing to do with not understanding fans wants, this has to do with the artist and the last few things they actually own.
 
Ok, ok. I get it now. I was just kind of flabbergasted that you were reacting so strongly in previous posts, which caused me to react strongly. I apologize.

this has to do with the artist and the last few things they actually own.

BUT, you are mistaken if you think most artists actually own their masters. I would love to live in a world, as a musician, where I was comfortable in knowing that I owned and had the rights to everything I released. Although, with the industry as it is, maybe this will be the case in the coming years.
 
pacemaker said:


BUT, you are mistaken if you think most artists actually own their masters. I would love to live in a world, as a musician, where I was comfortable in knowing that I owned and had the rights to everything I released. Although, with the industry as it is, maybe this will be the case in the coming years.

Which would make such a move as releasing multitracks even worse.

Hopefully now you understand a little bit as to why I react so strongly. No fan would ever expect movie makers to release their footage unedited so you can remake the movie, no one would ever expect for Nestle to release their recipes... Yet now fans are expecting, even in some cases degrading the artists for not releasing their art this way?
 
I do see it possibly "thriving" as a niche kind of thing... if niche sorts of things can "thrive".

Like I said, along the lines of people isolating certain tracks to see if they can pick out room ambiance, breathing noises, what have you. Most likely audiophiles who have high end systems, or for schools for educational purposes. I went to Northeastern and majored in Music Industry, and I KNOW some of my Professors would kill to have access to these.

As a business move, it would make no sense to market it to the casual listener. But I do think that people who are really passionate about the process might be willing to pay a premium to get their hands on multi-tracks.

What would REALLY interest me is multi-tracks of Hum or My Bloody Valentine albums to... erm... study, I suppose, all of the different tracks of guitar and pick out performance nuances and the like.
 
Well of course, it would be incredible to hear these things, it would just be a legal and artistic nightmare for so many bands. I guess the only way I could see it being done is if there was someway to make the tracks unable to reproduce, which to my knowledge is impossible, unless they placed a click track of some sort and that would just be annoying.
 
ponkine said:

Isn't there a way to compress SACD down to mp3? I didn't get into SACD because it was so limited I wouldn't be able to play it in my car or iPod, and then someone recently told me there is a way to compress it down to mp3... :shrug:
 
I was thinking on Hybrid SACD. The "red book" layer an be played on any CD player, has more capacity than a standard CD and apparently it's impossible to copy.

Surely some signals of the SACD can be copied, but people can't make SACDs at home. At most, they can copy the "CD" portion only, not the multichannel or the 5.1

:cool:
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:


You don't release your multitracks, because you mixed and mastered for hours and hours in order for the public to hear it a certain way. Once you release your multitracks all that work is useless. You've open the door for anyone with a computer to remix your work, to remaster your work, so the internet and radiowaves are full with shit versions of your songs, but the majority of them will be out there with your name on it. If you access to the multitracks you could slightly remix and remaster any song of your choice, now what to stop radio from playing what the band thinks is a crap version?

Even though I would love to have this multitracks and edit them my own way I agree with what you say. They spend far too much time writing, arranging and then mixing the songs the way they think they should be heard. After all they wrote it, they own it and also they are trusted upon their capacities as artists (by each band's fans) to give us the best version of the songs they have written themselves so why would they want something that they might hate out there with their own name on. Undoubtly some people would at some point start downloading someone else’s mix thinking it's the band's version. And that would suck. I wouldn't like that either.
 
Back
Top Bottom