U2: Protecting this House since 1976 -> AKA, more new album talk

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Why do fans on message boards feels that U2 owe them an explanation on the time frame of the release of an album?It's pretty obvious that U2 think that some songs needs to be more polish.When they'll be happy of what they got,they'll set a date,period.

And like a few have said,there is no delay,since there's haven't been a release date announce,only a vague time frame earlier this year,of maybe fall 2013.

Most of all, there is no delay because there has been no official word autumn this year release isn't happening.
 
I'm OK with a "delay." The end of this year is totally stacked and a February leak would give me something to listen to during the quietest part of any year.

Plus, I'm broke.
 
U2 could release the album AND start the tour in March. It's not like U2 will need the help of a new album to sell out arenas in the US. Put tickets on sale in January, when the first single will likely be released.
 
megalodon-giant-shark.jpg
 
U2 could release the album AND start the tour in March. It's not like U2 will need the help of a new album to sell out arenas in the US. Put tickets on sale in January, when the first single will likely be released.

They could, but I can't see that happening. The last time they did something akin to this strategy (PopMart) they fell so hard on their ass it's still bruised. They didn't learn the new songs properly, and they were generally rusty as hell during those first shows. They're not virtuosos who can embark on tours with very little practice. They need a good chunk of time (several months) to prepare.
 
i fully understand the U2 machine takes much, much, much longer to get going than it did in 1986. and i fully understand that U2 are much, much different people than they were in 1986. i also understand that the industry is different than in 1986. i get that U2 has to say something new in order to be justified in saying anything at all since they've already said quite a bit. i appreciate the weight of their own history, as well as the difficulty in not just topping yourself but doing it as well as you did when you once did it as well as anyone that has ever done it.

but, still, the gap between albums since 2000 is shocking, if they are after "relevance." yes, the tours have been smashing, and extensive. but there should be *something* else to go on.

and i don't think their work ethic is the problem.

Well said -- apparently 'going away to dream it all up again' is taking much much longer these days.

Somewhere between this notion of relevancy, two crap albums and your out, and perhaps a dose of perfectionism is what I'll go with.

I sure hop it is not a concern about outselling Lady Gaga this Fall for creepers sake cuz if so, someone needs to pass out the Reality Pills stat.

All I know, it's hard to be a U2 fan after all these years -- if the new disc is 2014 that makes for about 30 some odd songs in 14 years or 2 per year..... and a big yawn compared to the good old days of 1982.
 
Well said -- apparently 'going away to dream it all up again' is taking much much longer these days.
Why does this phrase keep popping up with people thinking that this is the case this time around? When in this album cycle have U2 said anything even similar to "dreaming it up again"?

Obviously we have no whiff of anything on the new album, but anybody expecting a radical change like the one between Rattle and Hum and Achtung Baby (and I definitely think there are some) is setting themselves up for disappointment.
 
Why does this phrase keep popping up with people thinking that this is the case this time around? When in this album cycle have U2 said anything even similar to "dreaming it up again"?

Obviously we have no whiff of anything on the new album, but anybody expecting a radical change like the one between Rattle and Hum and Achtung Baby (and I definitely think there are some) is setting themselves up for disappointment.

220px-From_the_Sky_Down.jpg
 
Hmmm -- maybe that' the point. They have not said anything about dreaming it all up again yet it is taking longer than the original dreaming it all up again.

Perhaps semantic gymnastics for "good grief, how long for 30 some odd songs?"
 
Hmmm -- maybe that' the point. They have not said anything about dreaming it all up again yet it is taking longer than the original dreaming it all up again.

Perhaps semantic gymnastics for "good grief, how long for 30 some odd songs?"

Yes they have on From the Sky down documentary.
 
but, still, the gap between albums since 2000 is shocking, if they are after "relevance." yes, the tours have been smashing, and extensive. but there should be *something* else to go on.
:up:

I 100% agree with you here - and that doesn't happen very often ;)
 
U2 could release the album AND start the tour in March. It's not like U2 will need the help of a new album to sell out arenas in the US. Put tickets on sale in January, when the first single will likely be released.


That would be awful, because the focus would be that the dinosaurs are touring again, instead of being on the new music.
 
That would be awful, because the focus would be that the dinosaurs are touring again, instead of being on the new music.

Agreed.

U2 - How about NO TOUR and keep your asses in the studio for a few years and make 3-5 albums with material you have to make up for all the gaps between albums?

Also, play some smaller venues if you must go on the road. I'm old now - and I don't like standing on metal for 6 hours in GA - and at the same time, my old eyes can't see you from anywhere outside of the GA inner circle of love.

In other words - concerts at the Rose Bowl really suck. Concerts at the Greek or Wiltern are really amazing!

(I say this out of love)
 
U2 - How about NO TOUR and keep your asses in the studio for a few years and make 3-5 albums with material you have to make up for all the gaps between albums?

I don't think I'd like that very much at all. I like the album/tour cycle, and I don't know whether they could keep up their creative momentum without direct contact with the audience for so long.
 
In other words - concerts at the Rose Bowl really suck. Concerts at the Greek or Wiltern are really amazing!

(I say this out of love)


Dodger Stadium would have been a lot cooler, and not just because I live a couple blocks from it.


THO THAT'S DEFINITELY PART OF IT.
 
The Chili Peppers just released 17 leftover tracks from the "I'm With You Sessions", songs that didn't make their last album for one reason or another. That album had 14 songs in itself. The songs range from very good to barely listenable. Say what you want about post-Frusciante RHCP, but that's just a really cool gift for the fans. They said they'll want to start fresh when they head back to the studio to begin work on their next album. So why not release these songs and give the fans as much music as possible?

U2 could have done this with SOA. Not release it as an official album, but bill it as a collection of outtakes and b-side material. Once they made the decision to go a different direction with Danger Mouse, they should've just released all that material and started fresh. But God forbid... what if a collection of leftovers and bsides got a negative review, or didn't sell a million copies it's first week?
 
Dodger Stadium would have been a lot cooler, and not just because I live a couple blocks from it.


THO THAT'S DEFINITELY PART OF IT.

Convenience aside, how awesome would it be to see them at the Wiltern - or even a local club! By the time I was was allowed to go to concerts, U2 was already playing arenas and stadiums.

I'm 43 now - but I still love to experience a great concert. Unfortunately, the Rose Bowl experience was fairly brutal. The show was great, but the standing in line all day, the standing on the metal floor and not being able to move or else I couldn't get back to my spot, the heat, the Black Eyed Peas, the delay because of stage issue, the parking nightmare....it took some of the shine from that day.
 
U2 could have done this with SOA. Not release it as an official album, but bill it as a collection of outtakes and b-side material. Once they made the decision to go a different direction with Danger Mouse, they should've just released all that material and started fresh. But God forbid... what if a collection of leftovers and bsides got a negative review, or didn't sell a million copies it's first week?

I really wish U2 would still do this. When you release something called "outakes" - I think you can steer clear of reviews. Perhaps the bigger fear is that people/critics really love it and it will make NLOTH look that much worse...perhaps.
 
We could say it like that, or we could say that they feed off the energy of their audience, that live is where they live, or that Bono is a shameless attention whore and the others are his enablers. It's semantics, really, but I think the answer is yes. U2 are not Emily Dickinson. They want that feedback loop of audience love.
 
Yeah it would be nice if U2 released some stuff from their vault! I bet they have tons of unreleased songs with some real gems in there like "oh Berlin". They used to do a lot of the but while we got the achtung baby stuff and the new live songs not much else. I would be very happy if they said no album till 2014 but here are 20 left overs from nloth :)
 
The Chili Peppers just released 17 leftover tracks from the "I'm With You Sessions", songs that didn't make their last album for one reason or another. That album had 14 songs in itself. The songs range from very good to barely listenable. Say what you want about post-Frusciante RHCP, but that's just a really cool gift for the fans. They said they'll want to start fresh when they head back to the studio to begin work on their next album. So why not release these songs and give the fans as much music as possible?

U2 could have done this with SOA. Not release it as an official album, but bill it as a collection of outtakes and b-side material. Once they made the decision to go a different direction with Danger Mouse, they should've just released all that material and started fresh. But God forbid... what if a collection of leftovers and bsides got a negative review, or didn't sell a million copies it's first week?

they did at least give us levitate, flower child, love you like mad and all those songs from the 2000-2004 era. so it's not as if it hasn't been done before...there's a decent chance it will be done again for a fan club gift probably.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom