MERGED--> New Album In 2006???! - Page 5 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Your Blue Room > Everything You Know Is Wrong > Everything You Know Is Wrong Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 12-10-2005, 02:06 AM   #81
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
mobvok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: boom clap
Posts: 4,435
Local Time: 02:55 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2DMfan
That's 5 full months, minus the holidays to record Zooropa.
I thought I read somewhere that they recorded it in about 15 weeks, so that adds up.

Your looking at maybe a month of 'down time' after the 3rd leg ends. Stretching it, would be two months.

simply not enough time.
Not enough time to record a full album, but who says they have to record it all at once? I have no idea if they'd actually do it or not, but there's nothing keeping them from popping into a studio for a couple weeks just to get some stuff down on tape to fiddle around and get some sort of foundation if they want to pick it up in the summer again.

Quote:
"One day, in the studio, Edge came to me with this brilliant glockenspiel part, and I told him, 'No, we can't use that, that sounds too much like the typical U2 glockenspiel sound,' and then he told me back, 'Fuck off, I'm the Edge, and this is how I play glockenspiel.'"
__________________

mobvok is offline  
Old 12-10-2005, 02:23 AM   #82
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2girl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: slovenija
Posts: 21,072
Local Time: 12:55 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2DMfan


simply not enough time.
I don't think anyone is saying the recording of the new album starts Dec 20th, or that the album will be finished before 4th leg.
__________________

U2girl is offline  
Old 12-10-2005, 08:13 AM   #83
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: gone
Posts: 17,914
Local Time: 05:55 AM
well i've heard the edge really is working on some new stuff, so maybe we'll get something sooner than we think

i think a lot of it will come down to what bono's priorities are. if he wants to focus on being a musician, we might be able to get an album somewhat quickly. if he wants to focus on saving the world, then 2008 i'd guess.
Chizip is offline  
Old 12-10-2005, 02:00 PM   #84
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Utoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lovetown
Posts: 8,343
Local Time: 06:55 AM
Glockenspiel is the new cowbell.


One thing that we should remember about the quick turnaround of Zooropa was that Edge's life was shit at that time. He pretty much slept in the studio and did nothing but work on that album---hence his credit as co-producer on the album. Zooropa is pretty much Edge's baby. With his non-music life looking quite a bit better at the moment, I'm not sure there's as much of the necessary drive to push out an album in just a few months.

That said, he certainly has declared that he's been working on stuff, and Bono's noted that Edge has been on fire musically & creatively, so who knows!
__________________
Utoo is offline  
Old 12-10-2005, 07:08 PM   #85
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
VertigoGal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: I'm never alone (I'm alone all the time)
Posts: 9,860
Local Time: 05:55 AM
for some reason i feel like believing that we'll get an album next year...just for the fun of it!
VertigoGal is offline  
Old 12-11-2005, 04:08 PM   #86
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 486
Local Time: 10:55 AM
You also have to remember they have a bunch of tracks left over from the HTDAAB sessions.
Convoy is offline  
Old 12-12-2005, 01:04 AM   #87
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 04:55 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2girl


I don't think anyone is saying the recording of the new album starts Dec 20th, or that the album will be finished before 4th leg.
Well the logic I am using is that they already have a tour booked.
So if they don't use this tour, no album for 2006.

to explain it further, for the whole thread talking about an album in 2006:

If they were going to get an album out in 2006, I could only see them using the 4th leg and possibly a subsequent 5th leg to support it. Even if it's HTDAAB leftovers touched up and refined etc.

I don't see any way they finish the 4th leg, and then release an album before the end of 2006. Then have to go support that album on a seperate tour, it makes zero sense, logistically, monetarily, momentum-wise, or the band's endurance levels.
An album in late 2006, a following tour into mid to late 2007 would put U2 at 5 solid years of recording and touring, they haven't dont that since they were in their mid 20's, not 40's without a substantial break.

Why would they rush it with no deadline? They wouldn't. They haven't. They booked Zooropas first leg with an EP in mind, gave themselves time and it turned into an album.

There is no rush, there is no album waiting in the wings begging for finishing touches, they are going to finish Vertigo and start on the next one. Hopefully we will have our hands on it by 2007, but the whole point of this thread and my logic was to say, there isn't enough time for an album in 2006.

Someone needs to explain to me the sense in releasing an album later in 2006 or even early 2007 when they could have rested after leg #3, took 6 months to make a quick album, then had a 4th and 5th leg later in 2006 to support it. In fact, the extension of the Vertigo tour (with no sizable break for recording) is a ringing endorsement of the opinion that we are in for another LONG WAIT.
U2DMfan is offline  
Old 12-12-2005, 01:12 AM   #88
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 04:55 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Convoy
You also have to remember they have a bunch of tracks left over from the HTDAAB sessions.
Yes, but it has to be said, they had a lot of material left over from ATYCLB and it still took 4 years for an album to surface.

I don't expect it to take 4 years this time around, in fact a fall 2007 release date isn't unrealistic at all.

That would be only 3 years, and would be the shortest wait since Zooropa followed up Achtung Baby.
U2DMfan is offline  
Old 12-12-2005, 02:44 AM   #89
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2girl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: slovenija
Posts: 21,072
Local Time: 12:55 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2DMfan


Well the logic I am using is that they already have a tour booked.
So if they don't use this tour, no album for 2006.

to explain it further, for the whole thread talking about an album in 2006:

If they were going to get an album out in 2006, I could only see them using the 4th leg and possibly a subsequent 5th leg to support it. Even if it's HTDAAB leftovers touched up and refined etc.

I don't see any way they finish the 4th leg, and then release an album before the end of 2006. Then have to go support that album on a seperate tour, it makes zero sense, logistically, monetarily, momentum-wise, or the band's endurance levels.
An album in late 2006, a following tour into mid to late 2007 would put U2 at 5 solid years of recording and touring, they haven't dont that since they were in their mid 20's, not 40's without a substantial break.

Why would they rush it with no deadline? They wouldn't. They haven't. They booked Zooropas first leg with an EP in mind, gave themselves time and it turned into an album.

There is no rush, there is no album waiting in the wings begging for finishing touches, they are going to finish Vertigo and start on the next one. Hopefully we will have our hands on it by 2007, but the whole point of this thread and my logic was to say, there isn't enough time for an album in 2006.

Someone needs to explain to me the sense in releasing an album later in 2006 or even early 2007 when they could have rested after leg #3, took 6 months to make a quick album, then had a 4th and 5th leg later in 2006 to support it. In fact, the extension of the Vertigo tour (with no sizable break for recording) is a ringing endorsement of the opinion that we are in for another LONG WAIT.
Yes, U2 always tour an album. I also think this one could consist mostly of Bomb (ATYCLB?) leftovers.

While I agree Vertigo tour doesn't look to be extending past 4th leg, how about a fast stadium tour in 2007 to promote the follow up? Maybe 30/40 dates alltogether in US/Europe? (Just like Zooropa tour was a Europe/Aus thing and Lovetown was an Aus/Japan thing)

I know this would be extremely fast for them, but remember the original plan was releasing the Bomb in 2003 and work on the mystery "second" album's worth of material they apparently have. (10 songs off Bomb, not counting anything they might have demo-ed on this tour - remember the "blues song" that was reported on the soundcheck? - and not counting any ATYCLB/older albums leftovers) Add to that all the Edge, Bono, Adam and Lillywhite talk about it. Bomb would be out sooner if it wasn't for producer problems. Not forgetting the third Best of lack of material and the 5-0 coming up. I also wonder if they, as the years go by, ever even entertain the notion of not touring an album.

See, I view the cancelling of (never official or confirmed, I know) rumoured US/Europe 2006 dates as the sign of them wanting to get in the studio sooner rather than later.

All that said, it remains to be seen what the band decides to do - all we can do is speculate at this point - and I would have no problem with waiting till 2007.
U2girl is offline  
Old 12-12-2005, 03:33 PM   #90
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 04:55 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2girl


Yes, U2 always tour an album. I also think this one could consist mostly of Bomb (ATYCLB?) leftovers.

While I agree Vertigo tour doesn't look to be extending past 4th leg, how about a fast stadium tour in 2007 to promote the follow up? Maybe 30/40 dates alltogether in US/Europe? (Just like Zooropa tour was a Europe/Aus thing and Lovetown was an Aus/Japan thing)

I know this would be extremely fast for them, but remember the original plan was releasing the Bomb in 2003 and work on the mystery "second" album's worth of material they apparently have. (10 songs off Bomb, not counting anything they might have demo-ed on this tour - remember the "blues song" that was reported on the soundcheck? - and not counting any ATYCLB/older albums leftovers) Add to that all the Edge, Bono, Adam and Lillywhite talk about it. Bomb would be out sooner if it wasn't for producer problems. Not forgetting the third Best of lack of material and the 5-0 coming up. I also wonder if they, as the years go by, ever even entertain the notion of not touring an album.

See, I view the cancelling of (never official or confirmed, I know) rumoured US/Europe 2006 dates as the sign of them wanting to get in the studio sooner rather than later.

All that said, it remains to be seen what the band decides to do - all we can do is speculate at this point - and I would have no problem with waiting till 2007.
Well it really comes down to how much U2 want to mess with their own "market value". Someone who is in the market constantly runs the risk of becomong stale or tired. Part of U2's draw the last few years were that the U2 album and tours feel like special events that only come around like the olympics, every four years.

Doing a quick album or tour or both might be seen as "too much of a good thing is a bad thing" as they like to say. As much as any of us would love an album 6 months from now (or whatever) we've got to look at it from their viewpoint.

It might be part of their business and creative strategy to have the breaks to create suspense, even if they do have a desire to get back out and create music and support it with tours. HTDAAB's longer delay was only an abberation. If we are fair to U2, they took the same amount of time to get the last 3 albums out with the exception of HTDAAB being about 6 months longer.
The problem seems to be, they promise, promise, promise because they get excited (mostly Bono) and then they can't deliver on the promise (saying things like "the album will be out next year" and then seeing it go two years more).

We just have to ignore their enthusiasm to follow up HTDAAB quickly, it's going to take some time. Their albums have become "too expensive". If they wanted to take the heat off of themselves, maybe they could do a quick album with no tour.

That's why I felt like doing a Zooropa-like album or even an EP with 5 or 7 songs, really sounded like a great idea. Perhaps U2 originally thought something similar but wanted to keep what they had created which was the drawing power of great expectation.

I agree with you about the Vertigo tour being shorter than first expected, with rumored 4th legs and such. I think they want to get back in the studio and really all the band have said, paraphrased "we want to get back to the studio, that's why we aren't touring any longer than we are". I don't read into their comments as saying "we have an album coming out shortly"

I actually read them to say "I know it's going to take us a while to get the next album right, so let's start on it sooner than later"
I think most of us are agreeing on that.

I have no problem waiting until 2007. I'd rather them take their time and try and make an all-time great album than just to quickly do something and have to wait, God knows, how long for the next "serious" album. I have a feeling they'll do it anyway, so might as well expect a long wait and not be dissappointed when the recording hits "snags" that should be expected at this point.

One idea I had, was for U2 to record a double album, 20-24 songs release the first album, tour Europe. America and Australia/South America then, a year later release the second album and do two more legs. Imagine if they had an album actually finished and were playing select songs during the first 3 legs. The anticipation would be huge, and they would have all kind sof momentum heading into 2006. That's my own pipe dream.
U2DMfan is offline  
Old 12-21-2005, 12:35 AM   #91
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Swan269's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: HawkMoon
Posts: 3,695
Local Time: 06:55 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2DMfan


One idea I had, was for U2 to record a double album, 20-24 songs release the first album, tour Europe. America and Australia/South America then, a year later release the second album and do two more legs. Imagine if they had an album actually finished and were playing select songs during the first 3 legs. The anticipation would be huge, and they would have all kind sof momentum heading into 2006. That's my own pipe dream.

I think this is a great idea....play a couple of songs off of it during the remaining leg......it won't be your own pipe dream any longer.
__________________

Swan269 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:55 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×