JamietheEdgefan
Refugee
Now we all know that a may release isn't going to happen, i was wondering when we will see the next album.
I think there are two options:
1) They do the 4-5 year cycle thing, and release something in 2013/2014.
2) They make a quicker than usual comeback, in 2012, after a short rest once the 360 tour is done.
Both options have drawbacks and benefits. If they disappear for another few years, and maximise the gap between albums, it's likely that they risk falling into obscurity - they're in their 50's, their last album didn't do so well, and they have partially become a laughing stock because of spiderman, so lack of new material for a while could mean that when they do return, because of their previous problems, they're not very anticipated/ as big anymore.
However, perhaps a break is what is needed - U2 have been in the headlines since 2009, first with NLOTH, then the 360 tour, then Spiderman. Perhaps people are a bit tired of U2, and need to 'miss' them again. Perhaps a few years off would actually build anticipation for another album again?
If they do a quicker comeback, they risk not working on an album for long enough, and having their 'big return' when people are still overwhelmed with how much they've been in the media lately, making their big comeback less special. However, a faster comeback could serve as 'damage control' for NLOTH and Spiderman, making everyone forget about the bad, and remember how good u2 can be. Plus, it would prevent the potentially risky several year long disappearance of an already old, and not-as-popular-as-they-could-be band.
So, both options have benefits, and drawbacks. Which do you think U2 will take, and why?
I think there are two options:
1) They do the 4-5 year cycle thing, and release something in 2013/2014.
2) They make a quicker than usual comeback, in 2012, after a short rest once the 360 tour is done.
Both options have drawbacks and benefits. If they disappear for another few years, and maximise the gap between albums, it's likely that they risk falling into obscurity - they're in their 50's, their last album didn't do so well, and they have partially become a laughing stock because of spiderman, so lack of new material for a while could mean that when they do return, because of their previous problems, they're not very anticipated/ as big anymore.
However, perhaps a break is what is needed - U2 have been in the headlines since 2009, first with NLOTH, then the 360 tour, then Spiderman. Perhaps people are a bit tired of U2, and need to 'miss' them again. Perhaps a few years off would actually build anticipation for another album again?
If they do a quicker comeback, they risk not working on an album for long enough, and having their 'big return' when people are still overwhelmed with how much they've been in the media lately, making their big comeback less special. However, a faster comeback could serve as 'damage control' for NLOTH and Spiderman, making everyone forget about the bad, and remember how good u2 can be. Plus, it would prevent the potentially risky several year long disappearance of an already old, and not-as-popular-as-they-could-be band.
So, both options have benefits, and drawbacks. Which do you think U2 will take, and why?
