Someday U2 will have a new album. Today is not that day. discuss.

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.
Not really, the same fans that saw AB as a sellout viewed the Zoo tour as a complete confirmation of it. They lost "some" hardcore fans with AB and ZooTV (I was friends with a few of them at the time), but they gained new ones also. I have said this before, Zoo TV was great, but it was not head and shoulders above any other U2 tour I have seen or some magical event. It was just different and somewhat original for the time. The great performances on that tour were no better than the great performances from any other tour to me. :shrug:

But they can't deny the excellent performance of TTTYAATW ;)
 
If U2 are going back to New York soon, we'll probably have confirmation of it fairly quickly.
 
That's exactly my point. There's all this talk about how this news is cringe worthy or that title is cringe worthy, but that's always been the case with U2, even for the "greatest album ever".

I can only imagine the cringing in 1986/1987 when U2 fans heard the new album would be named after a type of tree. I think that album turned out ok, no?
 
Well if those Larry rumor/statements are true then its pretty much in line with his last comment of trying to finish this album by the end of the year.

-Sept/Oct Finish Album
-Nov/Dec Plan Marketing/Xmas break
-Dec/Jan Release 1st single

2014 U2 Returns

:up:

Agreed. I don't think the holiday season release is as important as people make out or as important as it used to be. I don't think releasing in March last time out was a mistake, just the wrong first single and lack of radio-friendly material on the album.

After hearing the new rumours of a release either in late November or in February, looking back at the crisis mode of late after Bono's radio interview is somewhat hilarious. Then again, the U2 online community is always in crisis mode.
 
I can only imagine the cringing in 1986/1987 when U2 fans heard the new album would be named after a type of tree. I think that album turned out ok, no?

No cringing. We had hints of the new direction in the Amnesty concerts, then the first I remember of the new songs was a live Whistle Test set that consisted of Exit and In God's Country, Edge playing a Les Paul, pony-tails and all. Imagine Exit being your first introduction to the new album (With Or Without You may already have been out, can't remember).
 
i'm not sure the house is worth protecting at this point. it might just be time to burn it down now.
 
That's definitely Bono. It sounds like an IEM recording, so it's probably from a soundcheck. It also sounds awesome.
 
That one point about the celtic sound. I have wondered if u2 have considered at some point going into a world music/celtic/traditional irish/non rock approach. Or at least in part. Like u2 doing their version of "graceland". A album that really was considered a standard in reinventing ones self. That album I feel does not get mentioned enough when anyone anywhere talks about doing something "different".

The few times that bono has attempted a more traditional Irish sound he's sounded absolutely phenomenal. I'm still dying for Scorsese to release the studio version of Báidín Fheilimí from Gangs of New York.
 
Wow, who are these guys commenting on Alan Carr's blog? They sure know how to yank our chain, at least.

I like how Alan keeps posting all this rumory U2 minutia while going, "It's totally unfounded, we have no way of knowing and it probably doesn't matter, so let's keep talking about it anyway." I'd say he's our kind of guy.

The few times that bono has attempted a more traditional Irish sound he's sounded absolutely phenomenal.

Sources there? I've never heard any of those.
 
No cringing. We had hints of the new direction in the Amnesty concerts, then the first I remember of the new songs was a live Whistle Test set that consisted of Exit and In God's Country, Edge playing a Les Paul, pony-tails and all. Imagine Exit being your first introduction to the new album (With Or Without You may already have been out, can't remember).

I was kind of joking but thanks for the insight.
 
Wow, who are these guys commenting on Alan Carr's blog? They sure know how to yank our chain, at least.

I like how Alan keeps posting all this rumory U2 minutia while going, "It's totally unfounded, we have no way of knowing and it probably doesn't matter, so let's keep talking about it anyway." I'd say he's our kind of guy.

Sources there? I've never heard any of those.
http://forum.atu2.com/index.php?topic=20586.0
 
Not really, the same fans that saw AB as a sellout viewed the Zoo tour as a complete confirmation of it. They lost "some" hardcore fans with AB and ZooTV (I was friends with a few of them at the time), but they gained new ones also.

I have said this before, Zoo TV was great, but it was not head and shoulders above any other U2 tour I have seen or some magical event. It was just different and somewhat original for the time. The great performances on that tour were no better than the great performances from any other tour to me. :shrug:

Just to along with your first point - I thought it was interesting what the Foo Fighters' Taylor Hawkins had to say about U2 in a Hot Press article from 2005(I assume since it's 2005, the 'this tour' he's referring to is Vertigo):

To be honest, I'm probably more of an older U2 fan. I was a really huge fan of 'Boy', 'October', 'War' and 'The Unforgettable Fire'. I like their new stuff here and there, but my favourite stuff is really the early, underproduced stuff.

'Under A Blood Red Sky' was a really big record for me when I was a kid, but there's something about 'Boy', man I love it: the energy, the youthfulness of it and I just love the way they sounded back then.

With U2 you can't listen to the first four albums in the sun. You can almost only really enjoy then in the winter because they have this darkness to them. You just think of them in the snow with those big overcoats on, all earnest, like in the 'New Years Day' video. By 'Joshua Tree', though, you could listen to them in the sun.

I met Larry Mullen Jnr when I was real young, at the MTV Awards. I was playing with Alanis Morissette when I was 23. I went up to him and said 'Dude, you were such an influence to me and to so many drummers and I just think you're really great'. He was really nice to me.

I regret to say I never saw them play back in the day, but I just saw them on this tour and they were really great. I saw them on the 'Achtung Baby' tour and I didn't like that so much. I like some of that record but I don't love all of it, and I wasn't really into the ironic rock star thing they were going for at that time. They were kinda taking the piss out of being rock guys and I'm just not really into joke rock. Even though the songs were serious and I definitely like a couple of songs off that record, just the vibe and the huge stage and the cars with lights and shit on them, I couldn't pay attention to what was going on: it was too much of a multi-media affair

But when I saw them on this tour, it was a really good, stripped-down rock show. They played 'Electric Co/An Cat Dudh' and that was the highlight of the show for me. I would love to see them in a club, just playing their first three records. I like their new stuff but it's more worldly now.

I love ZooTV, even though I was too young to go.
 
Just to along with your first point - I thought it was interesting what the Foo Fighters' Taylor Hawkins had to say about U2 in a Hot Press article from 2005(I assume since it's 2005, the 'this tour' he's referring to is Vertigo):

I love ZooTV, even though I was too young to go.

Thanks for posting that. I'm a huge Foo fan and even met Hawkins on a couple of occasions myself (very nice guy as well). Hawkins always spoke highly of U2's earlier stuff, but it was neat to see him give some credit to their Vertigo tour as well.

As for his comment on Zoo TV... different strokes for different people, right? I'm sure there's some on here that weren't big on that tour either, and he even acknowledged that it wasn't supposed to be taken 100 percent seriously.
 
Problem is you are expecting U2 to do something they really have not done before. Almost everything they have done was an effort to be relevant and the biggest/greatest rock band since they started. That is what they have always been striving for and I think they always will. They have indicated this. Seems to have worked pretty well for them for the most part. :shrug:

I do understand where you are coming from though. But what a lot of fans would like to see is usually not how U2 views things. I have found it is best to come to terms with that and enjoy what we do get when we get it.

:up:
 
what you think u2's reaction would be if the next album just tanked? straight up. commercial flop. critical failure. Public hated it. we hated it. Didn't go gold. Not a "flop by our standards" but a real FUCKING FLOP. Whatever they did just didn't connect in the least. garbage. Like if the first single was something like "grace". and that was the BEST thing on the album for real.
 
I wasn't supposed to say anything, but, I met Larry a few weeks back in Switzerland. I was trading guns for hash out of the back of my chocolate van mobile. Larry came up, in disguise, and gave me a bag full of cash and wanted several high powered automatic weapons. Since he was a preferred customer, I gave him the best that I had. But that wasn't good enough for Mr. Sullen Mullen, so he smashed the trunk door on my frozen hands and he grabbed the guns and took off like a man on a train. I tracked him down, like the drone that I am, and cursed him for being greedy. He assured me he wasn't being greedy, and told me he had "2 words" for anyone that thinks he was greedy. I said to him, "surely you can't be serious", to which, of course, he replied "don't call me Shirley".
 
what you think u2's reaction would be if the next album just tanked? straight up. commercial flop. critical failure. Public hated it. we hated it. Didn't go gold. Not a "flop by our standards" but a real FUCKING FLOP. Whatever they did just didn't connect in the least. garbage. Like if the first single was something like "grace". and that was the BEST thing on the album for real.

That's not going to happen so stop thinking about it. Even Passengers which was definitely not typical U2 material and had many weird elements was quite beautiful. They made that in 6 weeks. I doubt after all this time they couldn't best Grace with any of the 10-12 tracks. And I like Grace. :up:
 
what you think u2's reaction would be if the next album just tanked? straight up. commercial flop. critical failure. Public hated it. we hated it. Didn't go gold. Not a "flop by our standards" but a real FUCKING FLOP. Whatever they did just didn't connect in the least. garbage. Like if the first single was something like "grace". and that was the BEST thing on the album for real.

This wouldn't happen for countless reasons. I can see the possibility of a response of the critics/fans/public similar to NLOTH.
 
u2.com just released a official clip of them working on the final mastering of the album. they said this clip represents all the work they have done in the last 18 months. And how much they believe in the fans.
Slinky Walking Down the Stairs - YouTube


I fully believe after viewing that, the new album will be out in nov.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom