Originally posted by z edge:
I think it's a bit irresponsible for somebody to post something like this on a board for the world to see without any concrete proof.
If it is speculation (and I believe it is) then it would help if you said "in my opinion" or "I believe" to coincide with your point.
Respectfully,
Z edge
Irresponsible? Concrete proof? What on earth are you nattering about? I laid out a scenario I suspect to be true. I didn't claim to have any inside information or any sources in the know. Obviously it was speculation. Since every other post in this thread was speculation and "guess"-timations it's somewhat curious that you chose to single out my comments to object to.
I will say this in defense of my timeline:
Many Interferencers were insisting that U2 would release a new album prior to their summer stadium gigs. They were actually convinced that we'd get a new album in Spring 2002. The only "proof" or "concrete evidence" that these folks had were Bono's comment that the band wanted to "tap the energy of the Elevation tour" and Edge's statement that the band had done a little recording between the European and North American legs of Elevation 2001.
Bono made a similar comment at the end of the ZooTV tour. He suggested the band head to Japan and record the new album there. Didn't happen.
During the Pop tour the band did some recording in Australia and in the aftermath of the tour new song titles were even bandied about. (Anyone remember "If You Die, I Don't?") It still took a few years to see new material from the band.
Pop and ATYCLB both took well over a year to make and the band still insists that they needed a few more months to "finish" Pop. Are U2 capable of spitting out a new album in a couple of months? Yes, but Edge himself said that a hurried album wouldn't be a high quality U2 album. (I disagree with Edge actually. I'm a big Zooropa fan.) Still, if Edge thinks quality only come through time spent crafting new songs and if the length of time spent recording the last two albums is taken into consideration...
Sooo...if U2 albums take at least a year to make, and U2 haven't gotten to the point of serious recording sessions yet...And if they have a stadium tour to put on this year...
Well, I wouldn't get my heart set on a new album in 2002. Or 2003 for that matter. 2004 maybe. 2005 definetly.
MAP