New Album Discussion: Worthwhile, Informative, And Not Even Slightly Grating

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
powerhour24 said:
Why does everyone worship at the throne of Eno? Lanois has had much more of a tangible songwriting influence on them, and produced much of AB without Eno. Eno helped them to branch out and include more ambience and electronic tones, he is the the inventor of every successful era for U2.
Click to expand...


Lanois was in opposition to the direction they were going in with AB; didn't he even tell them they were ruining their career?

He may have done the majority of the production work, but make no mistake about it, the influence of Eno's strategies and suggestions are what took them as far down the dark path as it did.

If you haven't read Eno's 1991 article for Rolling Stone, "Bringing Up Baby", I suggest you do and then come back here and tell me he isn't worth being worshipped, even if he downplays his role in the work.

Bringing Up Baby
 
Paul McGuinness: "Okay guys! Enough rest! Time to work on the new album!"

attachment.php
 
Paul won't be rushing the band to finish the album anytime soon. I think what's happening is that LiveNation doesn't want U2 on tour in 2012-2013, because the Rolling Stones are reportedly going to be touring those years, thus they don't want their megatours to interfere with each other. Then, U2 will release their new album fall of 2013, and have a megatour in 2014-2015. It's about maximizing profits, I'm afraid.
 
The_acrobat said:
Paul won't be rushing the band to finish the album anytime soon. I think what's happening is that LiveNation doesn't want U2 on tour in 2012-2013, because the Rolling Stones are reportedly going to be touring those years, thus they don't want their megatours to interfere with each other. Then, U2 will release their new album fall of 2013, and have a megatour in 2014-2015. It's about maximizing profits, I'm afraid.
Click to expand...

i'm pretty aligned with that thinking as well. to expect an album any earlier would just be setting your expectations up to fail.
 
So it's the Rolling Stones' fault. :angry: :wink:

U2 wouldn't have to tour right away, especially if they want to focus on the "small spaces" that Bono is so concerned about. Or if they are planning to release more than one album in a short period of time. I would be really surprised, though, if either one of these things really happened.
 
lazarus said:
Lanois was in opposition to the direction they were going in with AB; didn't he even tell them they were ruining their career?

He may have done the majority of the production work, but make no mistake about it, the influence of Eno's strategies and suggestions are what took them as far down the dark path as it did.

If you haven't read Eno's 1991 article for Rolling Stone, "Bringing Up Baby", I suggest you do and then come back here and tell me he isn't worth being worshipped, even if he downplays his role in the work.

Bringing Up Baby
Click to expand...

Lanois also now says AB is his favourite U2 album.

Eno is the man with ideas - and Lanois is the one in the trenches in studio. U2 needs both of them equally*. And Eno is being worshipped way too much.

*at least until the overhyped "reinvention" of NLOTH came along. I'm not convinced the duo can still teach the old dog new tricks.
 
The_acrobat said:
Paul won't be rushing the band to finish the album anytime soon. I think what's happening is that LiveNation doesn't want U2 on tour in 2012-2013, because the Rolling Stones are reportedly going to be touring those years, thus they don't want their megatours to interfere with each other. Then, U2 will release their new album fall of 2013, and have a megatour in 2014-2015. It's about maximizing profits, I'm afraid.
Click to expand...

Popmart and Bridges to Babylon tour had overlap. Bigger Bang Tour and Vertigo Tour overlapped. Steel Wheels tour and Lovetown overlapped.

So, no.

And I for one would like to think U2 has enough of a backbone not to bend over to circa 20 years older "competition".
 
U2girl said:
Eno is the man with ideas - and Lanois is the one in the trenches in studio. U2 needs both of them equally*. And Eno is being worshipped way too much.

*at least until the overhyped "reinvention" of NLOTH came along. I'm not convinced the duo can still teach the old dog new tricks.
Click to expand...

I don't know if you can say that Eno/Lanois can't get them to fuck around anymore, more that U2 evidently just don't have the balls to see it through anymore. Eno/Lanois can make a case, but in the end they don't have a vote. Maybe 'back then' U2 thought more of their opinion, and these days after the success of ATYCLB and HTDAAB, they put more faith in their own 'reign it in' instinct.

But anyway, I agree with the calls for something fresh next time around. Someone who works in a similar collaborative way to the Eno/Lanois duo, which I think U2 absolutely need. I still fear they'll only get more conservative between now and whenever, and we'll end up with them heading back to someone like Rubin. That would be a disaster. I hope they go back to Danger Mouse.
 
Headache in a Suitcase said:
The stones will break 360's record on their next tour.
Click to expand...

And then U2 will turn around and break the Stones record in 2014-15. I know U2 says they want to do arenas, but by then the demand will be there for another stadium tour. Makes sense... why play 8 arena shows in Boston when they can make more money and play to more people by doing 2 stadium shows. The odds are very much against an arena tour, as long as U2 are popular enough to sell out stadiums.
 
U2 should do pay-per-view concerts in small venues. They would get the intimacy they desire in addition to a massive worldwide audience.
 
I hope U2 adopt the Stones' Bigger Bang tour model of playing a range of different sized venues within the same tour. It'd be a great shame if U2 become purely a stadium band from now on. The Stones were spot-on with their Bigger Bang venue size concept. It may mean playing to slightly less people overall, but you get a more diverse and interesting tour.
 
jay canseco said:
U2 should do pay-per-view concerts in small venues. They would get the intimacy they desire in addition to a massive worldwide audience.
Click to expand...

Love this idea. I wouldn't mind an "In the Basement" session as well. Live music can spread like wildfire on youtube which the L.A. concert showed so well.
 
purpleoscar said:
Love this idea. I wouldn't mind an "In the Basement" session as well. Live music can spread like wildfire on youtube which the L.A. concert showed so well.
Click to expand...
No Line On The Horizon: From the Basement would have worked perfectly, too. Songs like White as Snow and Fez might have been lost in a stadium, but they could have really taken off in that setting.
 
Fingers crossed they do it for the next album! I'm not so sure they would, but i love the sound of live u2, and it's always interesting to see how their songs change live, so i think it would be great.

Also, that radiohead performance was pretty awesome too :up:
 
U2girl said:
Popmart and Bridges to Babylon tour had overlap. Bigger Bang Tour and Vertigo Tour overlapped. Steel Wheels tour and Lovetown overlapped.

So, no.

And I for one would like to think U2 has enough of a backbone not to bend over to circa 20 years older "competition".
Click to expand...

But they were not a complete overlap for any of them. Which if U2 went on the road in 2 years they would directly compete and directly overlap.

Also, to compare Lovetown to Steel Wheels is a massive stretch for me. Lovetown was primarily JT make up dates for Australia and Japan and primarily in arenas and only lasted 4 mos total. Steel Wheels was a huge worldwide tour with extensive production. U2 were not even close to trying to compete in anyway with the Stones during that time frame under those circumstances.

That being said. I never really believed U2 would be back in 2 years. Just not going to happen. The Stones being on the road just gives them another excuse to delay or kick back. I have no problem with that, they have earned it.
 
The fact that during the entire 360 tour they were talking about the next album coming out "soon", I think we all kind of grew to expect the band to give us another album, and possibly continue touring. We all sort of lost track of reality, that being that this band DOES NOT do anything quickly.
 
Only made worse by the only new song to get an official release being called 'Soon'. :lol:
 
I wonder how many more posts of mikal and BEAL complaining about how they think the album won't be released for another 10 years we'll have to endure. :wink:
 
The_acrobat said:
The fact that during the entire 360 tour they were talking about the next album coming out "soon", I think we all kind of grew to expect the band to give us another album, and possibly continue touring. We all sort of lost track of reality, that being that this band DOES NOT do anything quickly.
Click to expand...

some of us knew all along and tried to warn others of the long running reality of how the 2 operates...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom