cobl04
45:33
Why would any of you want a 2012 re-recorded Pop? That would suck fucking balls.
Uber-pop!
- Thread starter Niceman
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
WalkOn21
Refugee
I don't actually think it needs finishing. "It wasn't finished (b/c we didn't have enough time b/c of deadlines etc. etc.)" is the hogwash U2 are always telling us (and indeed, themselves) if an album didn't sell as well as they'd planned. Quite arrogantly, if you ask me. As if every musical idea sprouting in their minds is a potential chart breaker and low sales must mean that the idea is still genius, it just "wasn't finished".
Instead, might the reason that Pop wasn't a huge commercial success, and indeed, not a favourite of many fans, just be that the concept didn't work?
Paul McGuinness in fact says in U2 by U2: "Pop is always described as the album that didn't get enough time to get finished. It got an awful lot of time, actually."
So I wouldn't want a "finished" / re-recorded version of the album myself. I quite like Pop the way it is, in fact.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Except that Pop actually ISN"T finished. You can hear fairly large editing and splicing mistakes throughout the album, so it's pretty obvious it was a rush job.
cobl04
45:33
I've never heard them 
in fact I was very surprised when I first heard Pop. Because I'd be on interference for a while before I heard it I was expecting tracks to stop and start at random, Bono or one of the others to stop singing/playing at any given moment...
in fact I was very surprised when I first heard Pop. Because I'd be on interference for a while before I heard it I was expecting tracks to stop and start at random, Bono or one of the others to stop singing/playing at any given moment...
WalkOn21
Refugee
I'm neither a music producer, nor a particular audiophile. Consequently, I can't say I have consciously noted any editing / splicing mistakes in Pop.
While I accept that some people who do in fact notice editing mistakes in the album might want a version without them, personally I have no reason for wanting a "finished" Pop.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
It's not that, it's the fact that if a band like U2 released an album with big editing mistakes like that in LNOE you know it was rushed. Why were the liner notes printed before the album was actually finished? Why were some of the single mixes superior to the album cuts?
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
I don't think anyone was suggesting that...
Ummmm, no. It's great, but not perfect.
mad1
ONE love, blood, life
I have to say I dont like Velvet Dress on it.
BUT its a great album in that its unique in a 'rare U2' way.
BUT its a great album in that its unique in a 'rare U2' way.
WalkOn21
Refugee
Going out on a limb here, but I can fully imagine that that might be because, U2 being U2, they had an already finished product (for which liner notes were already printed) and at the last moment they decided it wasn't good enough and rushed through some changes.
That really isn't such a stretch of the imagination. U2 are known for their last-minute doubts. They had an album, produced by Chris Thomas, ready for release in 2003 when they decided it wasn't good enough and instead made HTDAAB with Steve Lillywhite. And Songs of Ascent was already announced to the public, including the title of its first single, with the band eventually cancelling its release because they felt it was not the right thing to put out as the next U2 album.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
There is an old thread somewhere in the archives where people pointed out the multiple editing and recording mistakes on Pop, but I wouldn't know where to start looking for it.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
No, there was actual recording still going on after the fact. Not re-recording, but still laying down choruses, etc. This is well documented.
Going out on a limb here, but I bet Larry would disagree with you. Bono seems to be the only one that actually believed they had a ready to release album.
Galeongirl
Galeonbroad
SoA wasn't actually officially announced, nor was the title of its first single. Which was that anyway?
Also, Pop was actually still being recorded when the tour was starting. It wasn't out for... later that month I think. They actually laid down some choruses in a hotel bathroom.
Also, Pop was actually still being recorded when the tour was starting. It wasn't out for... later that month I think. They actually laid down some choruses in a hotel bathroom.
flukeson
The Fly
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2011
- Messages
- 44
Pop is one of my fav albums, I love it
WalkOn21
Refugee
Well, I guess the record label hadn't made an official announcement for SoA, but the band & Paul McGuinness were presenting its release as something that was going to happen, even saying in which month is was due to be released. They gave "Every Breaking Wave" as the title for its first single in Rolling Stone (link).
WalkOn21
Refugee
Eeh... no. Pop was released 3 March 1997. PopMart opening night was 25 April 1997 in Las Vegas.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Bono talked about SOA and EBW, and RS reported it like it was official, but I don't think anyone else presented it that way.
WalkOn21
Refugee
elevated_u2_fan
Blue Crack Supplier
I've said this before and I will say it again, as long as they re-release Pop in a "mastered" version (just a sonic upgrade) they can release any other version they want. They can have Joan Rivers and Justin Beiber doing the vocals on there for all I care as long as the original version is also released intact.
cobl04
45:33
Shut up elfa.
/bomac
/bomac
Galeongirl
Galeonbroad
Ah right, I was mixing up those two.
Galeongirl
Galeonbroad
Those were all unofficial statements being gathered by RS. Or are you telling me we should take all press releases now serious and prepare for U2's imminent break up?
Press takes whatever little info they can find and combine that and then present it as the truth or an actual interview. While most of it is taken out of its context and way out of proportion.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
I don't want to get into a semantics war, but I don't think you're understanding my point. McGuiness never referenced SOA, just read the quote above. Bono was the only one that ever truly referenced SOA by name as their next release. Others spoke about another album, but there were references to other recording sessions, etc that lead most to believe that they weren't talking about the SOA songs anymore.
hey, another person who thinks songs of ascent is a finished album sitting on a shelf in some underground lair!
elevated_u2_fan
Blue Crack Supplier
cobl04 said:
WalkOn21
Refugee
I always believe the music press. To this day I'm convinced Paul McCartney is dead and they replaced him with a doppelgänger. Also, Elvis and Tupac are alive.
Seriously though, of course I'm putting some belief in the credibility of the story if the band themselves say on several occasions that there's going to be a new album called Songs of Ascent and if the band's manager goes on giving tentative release dates to the press.
It's quite detailed information we're talking about here. It's not like them saying "maybe you'll hear from us next year" and a journalist making the headline "new U2 album in 2012" out of it. They actually gave details, an album title, the name of the first single, release dates. One might be excused for regarding that as a confirmation that a new album is indeed on its way.
Galeongirl
Galeonbroad
I think you're putting too much faith in what Bono says. Because honestly, the band have not stated SoA would be out. Only Bono had been plugging it. And frankly, when he's excited about something he's like a kid in a candy store. He is full of hyperboles and shit like that. So I have very little trust in whatever he says before albums come out. Because he also stated they had an album ready back in 2006. And that turned out to be WITS alone with Saints and then U218. Then we were supposed to get a new album early 2008, that became christmas 2008, that became march '09 with NLOTH. And immediately after they had 'tons' of material and they might release another album in autumn 2009, or early 2010.
Well it's late 2011 now. And we still haven't gotten anything. So I've given up on believing Bono. Bono lies. I'll believe we get a new album when it's formally announced.
Well it's late 2011 now. And we still haven't gotten anything. So I've given up on believing Bono. Bono lies. I'll believe we get a new album when it's formally announced.
Similar threads
