Why do U2 take so long to make/release a new album ?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Alternatively, you could ask, "how come it takes other bands such a short time to knock out a second rate album, after their first successful one, and then fade into oblivion"
 
Bomb and NLOTH were both delayed for "more writing" reasons.

I don't know about All that... but they got that one faster out of the gate after Pop (which itself was also delayed, for more work on the album).
 
If you're in doubt, just blame Bono or Larry.
It should work.
 
I think what U2 should do on the next record is kind of what they did with Rattle & Hum -- when they almost went to work with completed, fully-written, songs.

Edge and Bono and bash the composition out at their houses, Larry and Adam can have a little run through over at Edge's on a Sunday, then the 4 of them and some nameless producer who can press "record" go into a studio and lay it down in about two days. Maybe two overdubs, maximum.

THAT's the way to make a rock album!
 
i don't think they really have a reason to release albums more quickly
unless they'll stop touring i don't think their productivity will increase
 
I bet 'smile' wont be on his solo album...miserable fooker that he is

Given your "location", I'm gonna chance it and say that Larry is a lot happier than you (and I'm happier than you too - see what I did there? I made a funny. :applaud: )

I think what U2 should do on the next record is kind of what they did with Rattle & Hum -- when they almost went to work with completed, fully-written, songs.

Edge and Bono and bash the composition out at their houses, Larry and Adam can have a little run through over at Edge's on a Sunday, then the 4 of them and some nameless producer who can press "record" go into a studio and lay it down in about two days. Maybe two overdubs, maximum.

THAT's the way to make a rock album!

Trouble is, it would take Edge and Bono 4 years to write those "complete" songs. So the amount of time is the same. :)
 
Because they have long since lost interest in music, particularly and especially making music with each other.

Sometimes the obvious answers are the best.
 
Because they have long since lost interest in music, particularly and especially making music with each other.

Sometimes the obvious answers are the best.


So cold... so very cold....
273_cold_person_shivering.gif
 
its all about the lyrics............the music probably comes easy. its bono job to come up with some decent lyrics for the music. not always easy:huh:
 
Because they have long since lost interest in music, particularly and especially making music with each other.

Sometimes the obvious answers are the best.

Maybe. But then why not just break up? They could always reunite later for the big bucks.

Very few bands have found themselves in the situation U2 are in now; they're approaching their 50's, have a dozen kids between them, have other interests they're pursuing. Most bands go their separate ways (or have changed their line-ups multiple times, like the Rolling Stones) before they reach their mid 40's. The ones who do stick around don't usually put out albums that fans highly anticipate, like U2 does. Finally, U2 don't need the money, don't have to deal with a record company breathing down their necks, and probably don't care to see the same childhood friends 24/7. I think it makes total sense that they take so long between albums.
 
Technically, about every 2yrs we get some sort of new U2 material. ATYCLB was in oct 00. We got a Best of 90-00 in 02, than Bomb in 04, U218 in 06, and now NLOTH in first qtr 09. Where 2 where best ofs they still had at least one new song.
 
Because they like the hype?

Its another thing to take so long, if NLOTH 'bombs' it'll be another wasted 4 years. But Get On Your Boots, while its not lyrically mind blowing, musically, its fantastic!
 
I think it is a combination of a lot of the things mentioned in this thread. The band has sort of hit legacy mode. They can't get much bigger so it is a matter of what they can add to the family of albums. Fear and perfectionism seem to delay these albums a lot.
 
U2®

The brand has become bigger than the band. But, I'm eternally hopeful that NLOTH will knock my socks off. Decidedly naive? Perhaps, but it has to be this way.
 
They have long tours, and for good reason. As good as the albums are, a lot of us love their live performances even more.

They have families.


They are involved in a lot of causes and charities. The band actually has a life outside of music. And its a good thing; I firmly believe that one of the reason why they have the inspiration to keep writing music is because they are involved with the happenings in the current day and don't have their heads up their own asses as far as a lot of rock bands do 30 years into their career.

And yes, their albums are calculated. They have been for a long time. They like to listen to whats "in" and see how they can incorporate that into their music. They aren't afraid to abort a bad idea (early Achtung sessions, 2003 version of HTDAAB, scrapping the Rick Rubin material). And I do think that they wait for the right time to release an album. I don't think they'd want to release their album around the same time as a Killers or Coldplay album just because of the popularity (or lack thereof) of Rock music. All of 3 of those bands appeal to the same demographic and it would be optimal if their releases were spread out.
 
They don't. They don't take 4 years to make an album. That is a very misleading statement. They ONLY way one could think it takes U2 4 years to make an album is if one expects U2 to start making a new album the second they're done with the last one. You do not measure from the release of album A to the release of album B to measure how long it takes U2 to make an album. That is absurd. You measure from when they started making the new album to when the finished making the new album. Logical enough, yes? Now, we have no real way of knowing exactly when they started making the album that is going to be released in a couple weeks, but let's just say for the sake of a hypothetical that they start making the new album as soon as the tour for the last album is over. Let's start from the Zooropa-Pop transition.

ZooTV finishes in December 1993, Pop is released in March 1997 = 3 years, 3 months

Popmart finishes in March 1998, ATYCLB is released in October 2000 = 2 years, 7 months

Elevation Tour finishes December 2001, HTDAAB is released November 2004 = 2 years, 11 months

Vertigo Tour finishes in December 2006, NLOTH will be released March 2009 = 2 years, 3 months

U2 took less time to make this record than they did making the last three. And, in fact, ATYCLB and HTDAAB took less time to make than Pop did.

And this is assuming that they started making each album as soon as the previous tour ended, which is probably not the case, and this is not taking into consideration that each record, with the exception of Pop, was completed 1-2 months before release(even more than that for Bomb, if I recall), so those numbers above are realistically even smaller.

This complaint that people have about U2 taking SO long to make a record is based in false and inaccurate measurements.

The reason there's so much time between each batch of new U2 music is because they tour more than a lot of other bands do.
 
Not to mention HMTMKMKM and the Larry/Adam time in New York. They weren't idle between Zoo TV and the Pop sessions.

Which was taken into consideration when I said "And this is assuming that they started making each album as soon as the previous tour ended, which is probably not the case...so those numbers above are realistically even smaller." Passengers and HMTMKMKM and whatever else only means that Pop was made in even less time than the 3 years, 3 months I have posted, which only proves my point further.
 
The thing is your statement is more misleading, namkcuR. It assumes they don't start writing until the end of each tour. There are songs that aren't finished from the last album sessions, soundchecks and songs they write on the road. That's a lot of material.
 
The thing is your statement is more misleading, namkcuR. It assumes they don't start writing until the end of each tour. There are songs that aren't finished from the last album sessions, soundchecks and songs they write on the road. That's a lot of material.

That's probably all true, but I'd still bet that the bulk of a new record is made after the last tour ends.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom