ALBUM 13 - DOUBLE LP or NOT ?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
What the hell, U2? Seriously - how far are their heads up their arses with this album? Anybody (the band included) that thinks they don't want to have another 'Pop' problem should go back and listen to Pop.

Pop is an album which just about everyone has hated on over the years (including the band,) but I'll take it as an entire piece of work over ATYCLB/HTDAAB/NLOTH any day of the week. Pop didn't have a SIAM/BD/Vertigo type of hit, but it was their last truly 'soulful' release. There are big questions on that album. There are true emotions on that album from start to finish - side two is just about as dark of a trip as U2 have ever taken - save for The Playboy Mansion (but even still 'Then will there be no time for sorrow/Then will there be no time for shame' isn't exactly sunshine & rainbows.)

But they hated it. No ginormous hits. And then Bono got involved with the Jubilee campaign and we all know the rest of that story. And once he was highly involved with Jubilee/One/DATA, the band - or rather the quality of the songs - has suffered. It's not that there haven't been huge radio hits (BD/Vertigo) or impassioned songs (Kite/Walk On/SYCMIOYO), it's just that the lyrical continent has been watered down to the most basic levels - it's like there is this self-censorship that is happening with Bono's lyric writing that doesn't allow him to actually write lyrics that have real meaning or that may offend. Sure, you could say that 'Walk On' was old school U2, but writing a song about the imprisonment of Aung San Suu Kyi with the lyrics 'you could have flown away/a singing bird in an open cage' isn't exactly the same as:

'See across the field
See the sky ripped open
See the rain comin' through the gapin' wound
Howlin' the women and children
Who run into the arms
Of America'

Does anyone remember how anti-Reagan they used to be back in the day? Now let's see Bono talk about any world leader (especially US) like that during a concert, or to speak in anything less than the most flattering way about the United States. Christ - during the whole Iraq war (which should have provided a treasure of song ideas for the band) the closest we got to any form of a political statement from the band during that period was Bono quoting 'When Johnny Came Marching Home' during BTBS and wearing a 'coexist' headband. Not really going out on a limb there.

I know this post is convoluted, but the point is this - the boys in the band need to type in the phrase 'Chinese Democracy' into Google. After they're done reading that, they should watch an old concert of themselves. Anything from UF-Lovetown. Step out of your villa in France and take a look at the world. Be content that you had a Joshua Tree or Achtung Baby. And who cares about the radio (it's a dying industry anyway.) Tell Willie Williams to take a tour off and just go out on the road and play. You don't even need an album to do this. We don't need The Claw or a giant lemon. Just play some songs. Have some fun. And maybe your heads will be freed long enough to see that we are a very patient group of fans, but even the most supportive of fans have limits.

/rant
 
Does the Billboard story contradict just about everything U2 has been saying of late? YES. But that just means U2 arrived at this decision recently... as in this week.

Exactly! The lady that did the drunk interview with Bono mentioned something about announcing their upcoming arena tour, and Bono kind of dodged that question. I think that seriously was the plan until VERY recently.

I seriously believe U2 had everything ready to go. Super Bowl was to launch the album, and the first single was going to be Invisible. Fallon appearance was going to be to promote the upcoming album. The article said the tour was to be announced in March. Then somewhere something went wrong, but they already promised a Super Bowl commercial to BoA and (RED), so they had to deliver.

Those people who are still holding out for a surprise release are sadly delusional. There is no big secret masterplan... there is no plan at all! I'm not sure what the hell is going on.
 
Again, other than wishful thinking, why doubt the Billboard story? It's not a wannabe music blog. It's an industry magazine with sources in very high places. If they get the story wrong it would do far more damage to their relationships and their reputation than any benefit they would receive from getting "hits" on their story.

Does the Billboard story contradict just about everything U2 has been saying of late? YES. But that just means U2 arrived at this decision recently... as in this week.


They have been wrong before, just last year they got egg on their face by reporting people dead when they weren't and reporting a story based on false tweets.

No band, not even U2 makes a decision like this a year in advance.
 
Next tweet by Neil McCormick:

Neil McCormick ‏@neil_mccormick 6h
@atu2 I'm joking but I just had a sense it wasn't coming together. They need to take the time to get things right. 2017?

U2 is so not done. They can take their time if they want to for crying out loud. The album will happen when they are ready, so what? Anyone that far in their career of any kind can do whatever the hell they want. They deserve it after being a great band for that long.

And what do we know anyway..it is all just a guess. Many other bands to enjoy in the meantime.:D:hmm:
 
I've been checking these threads everyday for updates. It's just kind of become a part of my daily routine, part of my life. I'm not sure why I care so much when/if U2 releases their new album, it's just what I do. I've been anxiously awaiting U2 albums since the 90s. They're my favorite band. Sure, I like many other bands, and look forward to their album releases, but it's never the same.

Clearly, I need to take a break from this site, and U2 in general. It's having too much of an effect on my life. I'll check back here in the summer sometime, unless I hear of some U2-related news in the non-interference world.
 
They have been wrong before, just last year they got egg on their face by reporting people dead when they weren't and reporting a story based on false tweets.

No band, not even U2 makes a decision like this a year in advance.

tumblr_ll6v36ffDp1qe0kbso1_250.gif
 
If U2 are pushing the album to 2015, I think they should do what Bruce Springsteen did in 1999/2000 and just go back on the road, find themselves, road test new material and then hit the studio. They need to find new inspiration and the road may be the place to do it.

Excellent idea, but in practice U2 just grind themselves into the dirt on tour. Maybe they get really good at playing the same 30 songs over and over, but they don't become the kind of flexible rock and roll machine that the E Street Band does. And the material that does get road-tested is dodgy stuff like Glastonbury. They can't stop themselves from falling into jukebox mode.

If they could loosen up and play dynamic sets and learn to play as a real four-piece rock band again, that would probably do wonders for the whole enterprise. While they are looking back at their past, maybe they should pop in Under a Blood Red Sky and watch a working band slugging it out.
 
Being interested in charts/sales, I always thought it odd that U2 was pushing this spring or summer release.

As I posted at that "other" U2 site, R&H, AB, ATYCLB and HTDAAB were all holiday releases. Total U.S. sales per RIAA are 20M. Even if you take out AB, the remaining three albums - two of which are recent - average 4M in U.S. sales.

In contrast, Zooropa, Pop and NLOTH were all released in the spring and summer. The combined U.S. sales (per RIAA) are 4M.

In other words, the holidays are very good to U2's albums. Even in today's world, CD's and downloads sell exceptionally well during the holidays. If U2 are interested in having that one last big hit album, releasing in November - even late November, like HTDAAB - is the way to go. And a late November release practically is 2015. Then start the tour in the spring as they did for AB, ATYCLB and HTDAAB. There you go - big selling album and a tour.

Once U2 missed the holiday season of 2013, I felt it would take a year. If U2 have doubts about the music or production or whatever, they still have plenty of time to work out the kinks for an end of year release.

Of course, if U2 miss the holiday season of 2014, then I really don't know where their minds are. They may really be over-thinking.
 
Once U2 missed the holiday season of 2013, I felt it would take a year. If U2 have doubts about the music or production or whatever, they still have plenty of time to work out the kinks for an end of year release.

The only hole in that theory is that in October of 2013, they were still recording. Adam was interviewed for Walk In My Shoes and had said then that he wanted to be done "by Christmas". I know in the US, the "holiday" shopping season starts pretty much on Oct 31, with the huge push of Black Friday (Thanksgiving weekend) and then mega sales pretty much every week of December right up through Christmas Eve. Insane, yes, but that's how the consumerism-driven US goes, sadly.
 
Why has Larry been standing up for all recent performances? At first I thought it was just to be cool, but what if he really does have some health issues? Weren't there back issues at one point?
 
I'm disappointed as much as the rest of you, but I don't understand some of these accusations--throwing Danger Mouse under the bus? They said nothing about his ability and proficiency as a producer, but the band, the driving force behind a U2 album, don't feel completely satisfied w/ everything for some reason--it happens. And it's not like Burton could just join them in the studio; he had prior obligations that needed to be fulfilled.

And while I can understand the resentment and labeling the band's decision as "nonsensical," that label seems somewhat misguided. I don't think U2's justification for the delay is anything other than the music, in their opinion, is just. not. ready. So that's that--they're the arbiters of their work, and they'll release it when they're pretty fuckin' happy w/ it.
 
They have been wrong before, just last year they got egg on their face by reporting people dead when they weren't and reporting a story based on false tweets.

No band, not even U2 makes a decision like this a year in advance.

Of course they do. Tour logistics and booking (especially since they have missed the 2014 window), buying themselves time in order to basically start from scratch. There are plenty of reasons. It's not like they have a rigid timeline that says, "We will release our album exactly 10 months from now, on XXX, 2015." It's more like, "There's no way in hell we're going to get this out in 2014." 2015 makes perfect sense.
 
Why has Larry been standing up for all recent performances? At first I thought it was just to be cool, but what if he really does have some health issues? Weren't there back issues at one point?

It has to do with the small kit he's using. Nothing health related at all.

The back issues go all the way back to the Zoo days, if memory serves. He's had custom chairs made, sees a German specialist, etc etc. But that's never been a problem in recent years. In fact, I think Bono may have seen the same specialist when he injured his back during 360. :hmm: I'd have to go digging through the archives. :lol:
 
Does anyone actually see this album coming out March 2015, after the "failure" of NLOTH being released that time of year?
Something is off here. I could believe OCT/NOV release this year but March next year? No.
 
Of course they do. Tour logistics and booking (especially since they have missed the 2014 window), buying themselves time in order to basically start from scratch. There are plenty of reasons. It's not like they have a rigid timeline that says, "We will release our album exactly 10 months from now, on XXX, 2015." It's more like, "There's no way in hell we're going to get this out in 2014." 2015 makes perfect sense.


You really think they're starting from scratch? If so they ARE completely delusional; you've released 2 songs that have gotten strong responses, you've been working on this project since 2010 and you think you'll somehow have something ready in a year if you're starting now, and just a second ago you had journalist interviewing you about the new album?
 
Honestly, I was hoping both Ordinary Love and Invisible would be one-offs.

But another year of waiting? Ugh. Literally, some of us might die before then.

This once again reminds me of that famous Brian Eno quote about U2 never really being short of ideas just reluctant to stop talking about them.
 
I want them to retire. At this point I'm more looking forward to compilations and deep cuts, maybe even more official live material than whatever crap the next album will sound like.

Sent from my Note 3 using my S-pen.
 
I want them to retire. At this point I'm more looking forward to compilations and deep cuts, maybe even more official live material than whatever crap the next album will sound like.

Sent from my Note 3 using my S-pen.

Crap would be the right adjective, especially since they ditched a brilliant producer for Tedder.
 
You really think they're starting from scratch? If so they ARE completely delusional; you've released 2 songs that have gotten strong responses, you've been working on this project since 2010 and you think you'll somehow have something ready in a year if you're starting now, and just a second ago you had journalist interviewing you about the new album?

If they're calling in two more PRODUCERS (not mixers/technicians) and their current producer doesn't even know if he's considered the producer anymore, yeah, I'd say they're more than just tweaking stuff. Maybe not starting totally from scratch.

And yes, Billboard gets stories wrong sometimes. So does the New York Times and The Guardian and everyone else. But if Billboard is as catastrophically wrong about this story as you think it is, they would have already gotten a stern call from Oseary's lawyers and printed a huge retraction. The story has been out for an entire day now. Instead, there is cricket chirps from the U2 camp while the story gets picked up by Rolling Stone, NME, and every other publication of note. Not good.
 
If U2 won the Oscar = album release in 2014
Since U2 didn't win an Oscar = panic mode, 2015 release

Basically, they were hoping to get extra exposure and ride in on winning an Oscar...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom