"U2 confirm 2013 album"

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
lazarus said:
Pathetic that anyone would be happy about this news.

We already knew something was coming out eventually. That it's supposedly not going to be out until next year should only be met with disappointment.

Of course, until something comes from the band's HQ, I'd take this news with with a grain of salt.
Click to expand...

Generally agree, though if it's a Spring 2013 release that they're planning, then there's not much room for disappointment. Granted, it's doubtful they'll release an album in anything except for Oct/Nov, but you never know. They might have liked 360's touring format more than they disliked the decreased album sales.

that said, yeah, taking this with a grain of salt too.
 
the fact that there may be an album and there may be an app and, hell, maybe even a tour just got me so excited I decided to renew my u2.com subscription, cuz dammit I just don't want to miss out on the slightest possibility of better tickets :doh::doh::doh: <hopeless>
 
Purple!!!! :hyper:

If all that news does is bring you back here, it is enough. You were missed! :hug:
 
Why does this thread exist? This is being discussed in the new album thread anyway???

U2 hasn't confirmed anything, it was a puff piece for mercury...

This thread should be merged into the general new album thread as it is misleading and redundant
 
A 2013 album makes absolutely no sense. There's no good reason why it should take anybody that long to make a new album.

However, a 2014-15 tour makes perfect sense. In my opinion, that is the only reason we have to wait so long for a new album. Granted, they haven't played in places like London or Dublin in 3 years, but they also were still playing the US at this time last year. By 2014, it'll be time for another large stadium tour.

Had Bono not had his surgery, the 360 tour would've ended much earlier, and we'd probably be in line for a album this fall and a tour next year.
 
This either means nothing, or nothing more than, "Not this year!"

It's in no way good news, and can't be concrete 14 months or so out.

The album will be out in the Fall. Which Fall? Uh... yeah......
 
Still there is the possibility that Mercury records is hinting at a Rattle and Hum 25-anniversary set which we were expecting/speculating for a fall 2013 release. From their perspective that could be a "new" U2 record. :hmm:
 
The_acrobat said:
By 2014, it'll be time for another large stadium tour.
Click to expand...

Most likely not in N. America, they will be back in arenas in N. America on the next outing. I think Adam or Bono has basically indicated this in an interview. I predict going back to the normal cycle. Arena tour first leg to begin in N. America in early spring 2014. Europe will probably still be stadiums and will be the 2nd leg that summer.
 
Blue Room said:
Most likely not in N. America, they will be back in arenas in N. America on the next outing. I think Adam or Bono has basically indicated this in an interview. I predict going back to the normal cycle. Arena tour first leg to begin in N. America in early spring 2014. Europe will probably still be stadiums and will be the 2nd leg that summer.
Click to expand...

One throwaway quote in an interview two years ago and suddenly a tour for an album that doesn't exist yet has been laid out?
 
BVS said:
Would it make sense to bank on it?
Click to expand...

Well, while it doesn't make any sense at all that it should take anyone that long to record and release an album, it is U2 we're talking about. When you're talking about length between records, it's usually safe to assume the worst case scenario.

That's why I would bank on it, because it's U2 we're talking about. It's stupid that they would wait that long when they probably could easily release a great album this year. I think it all boils down to the touring schedule, because U2 aren't going to go back on the road without a new album, but they aren't ready to go back on tour for a couple years.
 
that's true! a lot of big bands take a long time to release a new album for whatever reason. lots of touring or just taking time recording a follow up!

but to be fair, other bands keep their singer's trap shut until anything remotely resembling an album is half done/nearing completion, rather than release an album in 2009 and let him bang on about a follow up straight away...then talk about 3 albums at once with nothing to show for it :lol:

at least with a band like Radiohead (for example) they just went 'surprise! Here's In Rainbows/The King Of Limbs after 4 years waiting for them' instead of talking for years about all sorts of mystery projects that apparently amount to nothing and drive their fans mad :wink:
 
edit - TRIPLE post...sorry tried editing an original post and my mind's elsewhere today.
 
cobl04 said:
One throwaway quote in an interview two years ago and suddenly a tour for an album that doesn't exist yet has been laid out?
Click to expand...

U2 plan out their tours a few years before they actually commence. They were discussing the claw design for 360 during the Vertigo tour in S. America in early 2006. They also set the itinerary and book venues, hotels, transportation, etc. at a minimum a year in advance sometimes even more. So what they plan to do for the next tour is probably at least tentatively set or planned.

Based on their touring history, what has been said, I would make a very educated "guess" that the next N. American tour will be arenas.
 
I think Willie Williams also has mentioned early talks about the next tour as well.
 
yes, I'm betting on arenas next tour too, at least in the US.

though I still think stadiums make the most sense for them. Bono can save his voice by playing one stadium concert that would easily play to just as many if not more than three arena concerts would.

still, from comments made toward the end of last tour, it seems like they're looking to go smaller next time around.
 
It actually makes much more sense to me for them to do stadiums, even in the US, after it was tested so successfully on 360. Just as much money for a third of the work. And I don't mean that to sound mean - it just allows them to perform in front of far more people far more quickly. They're busy people. I also think that stadiums helped tickets be somewhat less expensive than they would have been in arenas, at least on the lowest end of the spectrum ($30 seats and $50 GA).
 
digitize said:
It actually makes much more sense to me for them to do stadiums, even in the US, after it was tested so successfully on 360. Just as much money for a third of the work. And I don't mean that to sound mean - it just allows them to perform in front of far more people far more quickly. They're busy people. I also think that stadiums helped tickets be somewhat less expensive than they would have been in arenas, at least on the lowest end of the spectrum ($30 seats and $50 GA).
Click to expand...

Ticket prices for the arena shows were not really that much different in price. Only a few seated lower level sections near the stage were well over $100 and on 360 those sections were around the same cost. Otherwise the GA was still $50 and you could get rear stage nosebleeds for about $40 to $50 also. I got rear stage lower level next to the stage for $80 on Vertigo, I was literally 15 feet from the stage. My upper deck side stage for 360 was $95 and I was literaly at least 80 feet from the stage :shrug: They also have less cost with the production over the cost to transport, construct and staff a full stadium tour. The only advantage really they have for a stadium tour is they can do less shows as you indicated. So it really comes down to their own perogative about what they want to do, versus the cost or keeping ticket prices down. From what I have read from them they do not think they can top 360 for a stadium show at the moment and I do not think they want to do 360 part II. So I think they will most likely do arenas again and try some new technology there possibly.
 
digitize said:
It actually makes much more sense to me for them to do stadiums, even in the US, after it was tested so successfully on 360. Just as much money for a third of the work. And I don't mean that to sound mean - it just allows them to perform in front of far more people far more quickly. They're busy people. I also think that stadiums helped tickets be somewhat less expensive than they would have been in arenas, at least on the lowest end of the spectrum ($30 seats and $50 GA).
Click to expand...

I totally agree that stadiums make the most sense for them for all of those reasons and mostly for Bono's voice.

I think the only reason they'd consider arenas is because stadium shows are so elaborate and they are too old and unmotivated to try and top 360.
 
Hell, I'd be perfectly happy with them just using the same stage setup as 360.
 
I'd guess arenas just because they will feel they need to do something different than 360, and may not be ready to TOP 360.

But 4 years between albums again is kinda crap. :(
They could have released SOA in late 2009!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Achtung_Bebe
IO: It's been a while...
Replies
2
Views
1K
mikal
mikal
Headache in a Suitcase
New Album Discussion 9 - Larry needs new arms, ba rum pa pum pum
33 34 35
Replies
1K
Views
57K
clerks
clerks
prbiker15
Sphere Show #1 Setlist Party
14 15 16
Replies
451
Views
21K
dan_smee
dan_smee
dan_smee
U2 - the lost album
Replies
4
Views
1K
gvox
gvox
ascender_RS
Pop 25th Anniversary Thread... What do you want?
7 8 9
Replies
256
Views
22K
TheWanderer
TheWanderer

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom