Let's talk these new leaked demos
- Thread starter Registered Dude
- 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.
ummmmmm no way! joaoclaudiobh
The Fly
Jesus!!! great great leaked version LemonMelon!!! I`ve this version since 2003 (stolen from Bono`s pocket during a big party at Silvio Berlusconi house)....
Steved1998
Rock n' Roll Doggie
I can verify that it was recorded in NJ.
Steved1998 said:
joaoclaudiobh
The Fly
DeVaul said:Meh, not as exciting as the Popmart-era Melbourne soundcheck jams. There was one epic piece in there that would still be nice to hear in finished form. Oh well
I agree!!
JamietheEdgefan
Refugee
Meh, not as exciting as the Popmart-era Melbourne soundcheck jams. There was one epic piece in there that would still be nice to hear in finished form. Oh well
Where can one find these soundcheck jams?
sharebear
The Fly
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2005
- Messages
- 202
Just going by the tone of Bono's voice here, it sure sounds like sometime within the past year. Neither clip sounds even remotely similar to the Anaheim soundcheck, but I would bet they're from a soundcheck during the 2011 leg. East Lansing, MI perhaps?. It's an IEM recording without the click.
This thread is hilarious.
And they didn't soundcheck when they played East Lansing. These are not from 2011 IEM sources.
Blue Room
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
I can’t believe this thread even exists. The day after I posted the clips here and found people were taking it serious (IE that they may be specifically for the new album.) I explained the nature and context of my post and had the clips deleted by the Mods. Go back and read through that thread. Honestly that should have been the end of it IMO. I’m not a newbie here, why would I come here and try to perpetuate some huge elaborate hoax? I wouldn’t and I didn’t. Thanks for the negativity at me by some, you did not read or understand the context and my explanation in the other thread obviously or simply chose to ignore it. I posted a shorter clip of the same on another site previously with almost no reaction. So it was not even a new clip to the net!
The clips are U2 working on new material. I’m not offering any further detail. Hypothesize, downplay, doubt and speculate as much as you want. I am not planning to post any other clips. Why on earth would I at this point? It appears by some of the recent posts it would bore a lot of you anyway. It is not Melbourne 97 after all!
Moving on.
The clips are U2 working on new material. I’m not offering any further detail. Hypothesize, downplay, doubt and speculate as much as you want. I am not planning to post any other clips. Why on earth would I at this point? It appears by some of the recent posts it would bore a lot of you anyway. It is not Melbourne 97 after all!
Moving on.
mama cass
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2004
- Messages
- 6,293
oooh you're just adding fuel to the fire there Blue Room, and, dare I say it, loving every minute of it!
so... do you have any other clips?
ps- "new material" as in "new new material" or "old new material"? please clarify would ya?
gvox
Ghost of Love
Guys! He said the clips are U2 working on new material. New when? It could have been them working on new material back whenever. He did explicitly state in his most recent post that he had attempted to explain and rectify the situation by having them taken down "after people were taking it serious (IE that they may be specifically for the new album.)"
In other words, he never said they were clips of U2 working on new material FOR THE SPECIFIC NEW U2 ALBUM CURRENTLY BEING TALKED ABOUT AND WHEN PEOPLE STARTING ASSUMING THAT, HE TOOK STEPS TO ATTEMPT TO CORRECT THAT
If I've misunderstood you Blue Room, my apologies, but that is how I understood your initial joke then, and your explanation now. And why I didn't bother jumping all over it!
Context is everything.
In other words, he never said they were clips of U2 working on new material FOR THE SPECIFIC NEW U2 ALBUM CURRENTLY BEING TALKED ABOUT AND WHEN PEOPLE STARTING ASSUMING THAT, HE TOOK STEPS TO ATTEMPT TO CORRECT THAT
If I've misunderstood you Blue Room, my apologies, but that is how I understood your initial joke then, and your explanation now. And why I didn't bother jumping all over it!
Context is everything.
joaoclaudiobh
The Fly
I can’t believe this thread even exists. The day after I posted the clips here and found people were taking it serious (IE that they may be specifically for the new album.) I explained the nature and context of my post and had the clips deleted by the Mods. Go back and read through that thread. Honestly that should have been the end of it IMO. I’m not a newbie here, why would I come here and try to perpetuate some huge elaborate hoax? I wouldn’t and I didn’t. Thanks for the negativity at me by some, you did not read or understand the context and my explanation in the other thread obviously or simply chose to ignore it. I posted a shorter clip of the same on another site previously with almost no reaction. So it was not even a new clip to the net!
The clips are U2 working on new material. I’m not offering any further detail. Hypothesize, downplay, doubt and speculate as much as you want. I am not planning to post any other clips. Why on earth would I at this point? It appears by some of the recent posts it would bore a lot of you anyway. It is not Melbourne 97 after all!
Moving on.
Blue Room!!!! Yeah!!!
Ok... Well, we know you are not newbie here and I particularly believe in your words .. I already saw many things in this U2 universe that apparently seemed rumors but they were not ... Provide new "pieces" is your choice and would probably have their reasons, but information about the new material would not be a sin!
We would like to talk a little more about this new material, the CD that you have on your hands and your review about this new the songs...is it possible?
gvox
Ghost of Love
mama cass
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2004
- Messages
- 6,293
gvox, he hasn't clarified whether they're from "new new material" or "old new material" though has he??
and by saying today that he won't post "any more clips" it sounds like he's implying there's more where they came from...
i think he's just trying to throw the cat among the pigeons...
and by saying today that he won't post "any more clips" it sounds like he's implying there's more where they came from...
i think he's just trying to throw the cat among the pigeons...
Blue Room
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
Guys! He said the clips are U2 working on new material. New when? It could have been them working on new material back whenever. He did explicitly state in his most recent post that he had attempted to explain and rectify the situation by having them taken down "after people were taking it serious (IE that they may be specifically for the new album.)"
In other words, he never said they were clips of U2 working on new material FOR THE SPECIFIC NEW U2 ALBUM CURRENTLY BEING TALKED ABOUT AND WHEN PEOPLE STARTING ASSUMING THAT, HE TOOK STEPS TO ATTEMPT TO CORRECT THAT
If I've misunderstood you Blue Room, my apologies, but that is how I understood your initial joke then, and your explanation now. And why I didn't bother jumping all over it!
Context is everything.
Correct.
Blue Room
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
gvox, he hasn't clarified whether they're from "new new material" or "old new material" though has he??
and by saying today that he won't post "any more clips" it sounds like he's implying there's more where they came from...
i think he's just trying to throw the cat among the pigeons...
Thanks for the support. Appreciate it.
mama cass
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2004
- Messages
- 6,293
you watched this place go up in flames, had the links deleted, said it was a joke, but evaded all questions over the source of the files...
it's as clear as mud to me, so why should i offer you my support? i don't really care either way...
you wind people up because you refuse to clarify, that's all... and then come back all innocent and hurt
and by saying
you're implying there are other clips which you won't post here now boo hoo dot com
OP
OP
Registered Dude
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
really?
Blue Room
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
you watched this place go up in flames, had the links deleted, said it was a joke, but evaded all questions over the source of the files...
it's as clear as mud to me, so why should i offer you my support? i don't really care either way...
you wind people up because you refuse to clarify, that's all... and then come back all innocent and hurt
and by saying
you're implying there are other clips which you won't post here now boo hoo dot com
Ok, there are no more clips. Does that make you happy?
If you don't care, why do you keep posting your negativity?
Up in flames? Now THAT is melodramatic. I do not check this place out that much any longer. Once every couple of days at the most and I do not check every forum.
mama cass
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2004
- Messages
- 6,293
thanks! but why imply that there are then??
that's the definition of trolling to me...
and yeah i didn't care either way whether they were real or not - i'm old enough to take these things with a pinch of salt, but i'm only giving you grief because i think you've been pretty out of order and a bit dishonest actually, especially by reigniting it all with your earlier post today...
mama cass
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2004
- Messages
- 6,293
actually, pretty much the whole U2 internet fandom went up in flames over those clips, not just Interference! 
Blue Room
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
thanks! but why imply that there are then??
that's the definition of trolling to me...
and yeah i didn't care either way whether they were real or not - i'm old enough to take these things with a pinch of salt, but i'm only giving you grief because i think you've been pretty out of order and a bit dishonest actually, especially by reigniting it all with your earlier post today...
Great, report me to the mods, clearly I'm a troll here. Your responses are anything but taking it with a pinch of salt.
No, I was dishonest trying to placate you. Otherwise I tried to clarify the clips right away as much as I need to in the original thread as I pointed out and why I posted again here. I think you may be confused in that I owe you something. I dont.
Niceman
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
I can’t believe this thread even exists. The day after I posted the clips here and found people were taking it serious (IE that they may be specifically for the new album.) I explained the nature and context of my post and had the clips deleted by the Mods. Go back and read through that thread. Honestly that should have been the end of it IMO. I’m not a newbie here, why would I come here and try to perpetuate some huge elaborate hoax? I wouldn’t and I didn’t. Thanks for the negativity at me by some, you did not read or understand the context and my explanation in the other thread obviously or simply chose to ignore it. I posted a shorter clip of the same on another site previously with almost no reaction. So it was not even a new clip to the net!
The clips are U2 working on new material. I’m not offering any further detail. Hypothesize, downplay, doubt and speculate as much as you want. I am not planning to post any other clips. Why on earth would I at this point? It appears by some of the recent posts it would bore a lot of you anyway. It is not Melbourne 97 after all!
Moving on.
I don't understand. I haven't seen a lot of people theorizing that the clips were specifically for the new album. What just about everyone concluded was that it was U2 jamming on some ideas. We wondered as to when it might be from, but no one thought it was the new single. It's just a jam.
What confuses me is you say that we've made some kind of mistake by thinking the band was working on material for the new album... and then say it's U2 working on new material. Um. Okay. It's U2 writing. No one knows what if anything will come out of it. I guess I'm not understanding the leap. Unless you think we thought it was the new single, the clips are apparently exactly what most of us assumed....
You shared clips of U2 writing. We thought it was U2 writing.
Blue Room
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
My mistake then, because when I saw the other thread back when this happened that is what it appeared people were thinking. So I clarified. So I attempted to again here. I did not read through this whole thread so maybe you are correct.
I guess it is all about semantics and context. What you think of as "new" material and what you don't. I have no problem with it either way.
But, I did not reply here to stir things up or troll as I have been accused of. There are so many things I could have done to really stir it up if that was my intention. Instead I tried to clarify again.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Exactly. This poster knew exactly what they were doing by being so evasive. This is Interference after all, and this person has been around long enough to know the reaction it would get.
Once again EXACTLY. I'm not sure why the clarification even had to be made.
What I don't understand is the innocent victim play. To my knowledge no one here attacked you. You posted what is new U2 to 99.9% of the world and then went all coy about when and where it's from. It's a no brainer that people in here would want to know more.
mama cass
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2004
- Messages
- 6,293
c'mon Blue Room, just accept that you've been called out and stop playing the innocent victim!
Niceman
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
Weeeelll, I'd argue you maybe wanted to stir things up a little bit? But there's nothing wrong with that. I don't see how anyone could reward your generosity by calling you a troll. That would be kind of daft...
Similar threads
