Who's producing the new album??

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Re: Re: Whose producing the new album??

Michael Griffiths said:

Actually, Rattle and Hum (the album, not the movie) didn't flop at all. It sold an insane amount of copies - somewhere around the 9 or 10 million mark.

.

Commercially, it was a big success. Artistically, it is probably (argurably) their weakest album IMO. I love most of the studio tracks, but some of the live tracks...what were they thinking? (i.e. All Along The Watchtower.) Also the packaging & liners were U2 at their most overly serious & holier than thou, especially at a time they needed to lighten up a bit. Still, it is important album because without all the backlash it received, a lot of it justified IMO, we probably wouldn't have gotten Achtung Baby.
 
Last edited:
why would anyone (in music) need to lighten up a bit???

all I can think of is image reasons (though nowadays lightening up probably would hurt your image more then that it would help you) and who cares about image anyway?
 
If they went with Howie D, that could mean a variety of things, all of them bad.
 
Howie B was spotted with the boys at the recent Gangs of New York premiere...

now why would he be hanging out with them... in Dublin.... ?

Pop 2 anyone?? ;)
 
Howie B did some very interesting work on "Pop," and I'd love to see him again. Of course, that really could lead to the fact that William Orbit really *is* working on the next album, considering both are electronic artists in their own right.

I don't want Eno/Lanois. They bored me to tears with ATYCLB. I doubt either Steve Lillywhite or Flood will have anything to do with the next album. Someone new sounds probable.

Melon
 
no lillywhite.

it would be kick ass if edge didnt play any guitar on this album, or just laced everything with effects.

pure electronica, that would be so awesome.
 
Glen Ballard...

It seems U2 is aiming for a raw sound with a lot of life-force in it. That's why I think Glen Ballard would be the perfect fit. He made Alanis' Jagged Little Pill and let her sound raw and just herself. That became one of the most commercially successful albums ever, despite being raw with a lot of life force.

Bono said in Larry King that two crap albums and you're out. Obviously Bono's ego and U2's lofty expectations would also equate crap with commercial failure. U2 don't want to be selling so little. So they need help from more modern producers who know what kinds of songs will penetrate the youth sector of today. While I don't know the names, U2 should take a look at the producers of Aerosmith, Avril Lavigne, or the one who was responsible for Bon Jovi's "comeback" in the Crush album.

Lillywhite, Flood, Lanois, Eno, Howie B, Mike Hedges, Iovine --- they are all old dogs. You can't teach an old dog new tricks.

Cheers,

J
The King Of POP
 
Re: Glen Ballard...

jick said:

Lillywhite, Flood, Lanois, Eno, Howie B, Mike Hedges, Iovine --- they are all old dogs. You can't teach an old dog new tricks.

Cheers,

J
The King Of POP
Really? Bono's dog is old, and the four legged creature has recently been spotted (though I don't think he's a Dalmation) driving around Dublin in Bono's car. Driving!! How odd: a dog driving a Mercedes. Please tell me, J, that dogs don't know how to drive, or even know how to learn how to drive. But going by your logic - if the dog couldn't learn how to drive because he is old - he must have known inately how to drive! Don't you now tell me, J, that this dog did not know how to inately drive. For if he (for the purpose of this argument, I'll assume he's male) was indeed taught such a trick, your whole argument goes completely out the window. Let's see you refute that! (Guess tricks aren't for just kids after all.)

But seriously, J, if you want a serious argument, I'll give you one: If you can't teach an old dog new tricks, then what is the purpose of hiring a young producer (who knows the tricks) to teach U2 what he knows (if U2 themselves are "old"). In this scenerio - according to your line of reasoning - U2 would NOT be able to benefit from it, as they can no longer be taught anything. Is that the conclusion you were aiming for? Obviously it was, but there are plenty of examples of artists in every field - music included - who have created their best work well into their careers. Take Moby for example (and this actually kills two birds with one stone, as he produces as well), or even Leonard Cohen, who wrote his most commercially successful album well into his 50s.

It's all a matter of perspective. Luckily, quite often we can choose that.
 
Last edited:
Re: Glen Ballard...

jick said:
It seems U2 is aiming for a raw sound with a lot of life-force in it. That's why I think Glen Ballard would be the perfect fit. He made Alanis' Jagged Little Pill and let her sound raw and just herself. That became one of the most commercially successful albums ever, despite being raw with a lot of life force.

Bono said in Larry King that two crap albums and you're out. Obviously Bono's ego and U2's lofty expectations would also equate crap with commercial failure. U2 don't want to be selling so little. So they need help from more modern producers who know what kinds of songs will penetrate the youth sector of today. While I don't know the names, U2 should take a look at the producers of Aerosmith, Avril Lavigne, or the one who was responsible for Bon Jovi's "comeback" in the Crush album.

Lillywhite, Flood, Lanois, Eno, Howie B, Mike Hedges, Iovine --- they are all old dogs. You can't teach an old dog new tricks.

Cheers,

J
The King Of POP

i cant begin to point out how many things are wrong with this post.

you list aerosmith, avril lavigne, bon jovi and alanis morisette and their producers as someone u2 should look at??! no seriously dude, are you taking the piss?
 
on a totally different note, whats happening to the canucks?! they lost again tonite, and they should have lost last game. that would make four in a row.

i have a very bad feeling... :|
 
Yes, I know. The Canucks are in a major slump right now. For whatever reasons. In a way, though, this is a good thing. It better it happen now than at the end of the year. I believe they'll still finish off near the top of the conference (they've got too much talent not to), as they've proven to everyone, most notably themselves, that they can beat any team on any given night. They just have to get back into the groove, which WILL happen - hopefully sooner than later. I think they're just a bit fatigued right now. I think also that they might have been doing a bit too much celebrating lately (but that's just pure speculation). The whole team is a bit off, not as sharp as they usually are. Don't worry, it can only return.
 
how does verte expect to wipe out aids if she cant even differentiate between hockey and football?!

:p
 
Back
Top Bottom