It is of course my personal opinion that it would be the wrong choice artistically. Although I could be wrong. I think that a critical and financial mistake would be much more likely. I was just joking about you being negative though (as a farcical defense of my own negative comments over the last few hours).
New Edge interview 11/20/2008
- Thread starter purpleoscar
- 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.
Clawgrabber
War Child
whatever happens, i just want more than 10 songs. a 15 track u2 album would be great.
at the very least, with all this talk of edge saying "we have 2-3 albums worth blah blah" plus the rubin sessions and spidey stuff, it better not be another five years after NLOTH clocks in a 46:28 to hear another cd from these dudes.
maybe they will release a new 12 track album every day in 2009. Bono said it would be U2's year after all. and that's only 4380 new songs. U2 could pull it off.
and that's not even including b sides!
at the very least, with all this talk of edge saying "we have 2-3 albums worth blah blah" plus the rubin sessions and spidey stuff, it better not be another five years after NLOTH clocks in a 46:28 to hear another cd from these dudes.
maybe they will release a new 12 track album every day in 2009. Bono said it would be U2's year after all. and that's only 4380 new songs. U2 could pull it off.
and that's not even including b sides!
lazarus
Blue Crack Supplier
A couple notes--sorry I'm late to this discussion:
I don't think a band who would lop off Mercy and Fast Cars to get an album well under an hour are really the kind of people who would consider a double album.
Having said that, they were in a more "pop" mode back then, and wanted to distill things down to a finer point. Maybe they're feeling more ambitious now, but I'm still having a hard time seeing it.
Also, I don't know if bringing The White Album into the conversation is a good comparison. While I think it's one of the better double sets (and I agree with the person who said that often on doubles the "filler" adds to the experience), The Beatles were in a completely different recording mindset. George, Paul and John were all off writing mostly alone, often bringing nearly finished songs for the other to complete. And the sense of oneupsmanship probably led to people fighting to keep including their own constructions. When a band is writing everything together, like U2, it's probably easier to discard things that don't fit a general tone they're trying to achieve. In the case of something like The Wall, Tommy or Quadrophenia, there's obviously a concept that requires a certain amount of pieces to tell the story.
Lastly, someone said earlier in the thread that all the songs are going to come from post-2006. That's totally not true, because in the interview Edge said that half of the material was coming from stuff they'd been kicking around for a while, things that have been rewritten, rearranged, etc. And while that does give hope to the Mercy crowd (myself included) we should be careful what we wish for because it will probably be quite mutated from what we know and love.
I don't think a band who would lop off Mercy and Fast Cars to get an album well under an hour are really the kind of people who would consider a double album.
Having said that, they were in a more "pop" mode back then, and wanted to distill things down to a finer point. Maybe they're feeling more ambitious now, but I'm still having a hard time seeing it.
Also, I don't know if bringing The White Album into the conversation is a good comparison. While I think it's one of the better double sets (and I agree with the person who said that often on doubles the "filler" adds to the experience), The Beatles were in a completely different recording mindset. George, Paul and John were all off writing mostly alone, often bringing nearly finished songs for the other to complete. And the sense of oneupsmanship probably led to people fighting to keep including their own constructions. When a band is writing everything together, like U2, it's probably easier to discard things that don't fit a general tone they're trying to achieve. In the case of something like The Wall, Tommy or Quadrophenia, there's obviously a concept that requires a certain amount of pieces to tell the story.
Lastly, someone said earlier in the thread that all the songs are going to come from post-2006. That's totally not true, because in the interview Edge said that half of the material was coming from stuff they'd been kicking around for a while, things that have been rewritten, rearranged, etc. And while that does give hope to the Mercy crowd (myself included) we should be careful what we wish for because it will probably be quite mutated from what we know and love.
Screwtape2
Blue Crack Addict
Great interview. 
I'm really excited about Bono's lyrical approach, Unknown Caller and that Moment of Surrender is making the record.
I'm really excited about Bono's lyrical approach, Unknown Caller and that Moment of Surrender is making the record.
Rachel D.
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
Since this interview is called a "director's cut" by the author, is there more to it than this in the actual magazine?
Fullonedge3
The Fly
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2008
- Messages
- 298
Actually, Edge did say the Rubin tracks were being shelved for now. Just because half of the material has been kicked around a while doesn't mean it's coming from '06 or earlier. It very well could mean (and this is how I interpreted it) that some of the tracks they wrote in Fez were spontaneous one-offs while the rest of the tracks have undergone more thorough transformations since Fez.
Registered Dude
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
there's a scan of the magazine article at u2.com that shows what seems to be a condensed version of this article. maybe the web version is longer?
also, the article makes it seem that Edge is saying February...
lazarus
Blue Crack Supplier
That's the Rubin tracks, and not what I'm talking about at all. Mercy is from the Bomb sessions, and I imagine they have other stuff from that time period we haven't even heard a hint of yet. There are songs from U2 albums that have had 5+ year gestation periods, so when I hear Edge say "a while" it doesn't translate to me as a year old. Let's look at the exact quote:
"How would you describe the overall personality of the new album?
It’s a record of two halves. One half is songs that came virtually fully-formed out of sessions we did with Brian and Danny – stuff we’ve only played once or maybe twice and that’s it: just the raw moment of creation. Then the other half is material we’ve kicked around a while and went through the usual cycle of versions and incarnations. It sounds like a U2 album but it doesn’t sound like anything we’ve done before and it doesn’t really sound like anything that’s happening at the moment."
Sounds to me like stuff other than the Rubin sessions, other than the Fez sessions ("Brian and Danny"). Again, this could be stuff they've had sitting around since the ATYCLB sessions, that was maybe too weird for what they were going for at the time.
Irishteen
Blue Crack Addict
Also I'm not sure if everyone is aware as well but Universal now have a policy of re-releasing ALL its major releases around Christmas time of every year. So maybe that's why we hear so much talk about two albums
They release the original in March
And it's re-released in November with extra tracks and a DVD
I know the Bomb deluxe edition was released with the album but I don't see that happening this time...
They release the original in March
And it's re-released in November with extra tracks and a DVD
I know the Bomb deluxe edition was released with the album but I don't see that happening this time...
pepokiss
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
that would make me cry
I mean... the new album, TUF re-release, AB re-release, new album re-release + tour?
give me a break
$$$$$$$$
Rachel D.
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
I hope they do what they did last time. Bono has talked about how they wanted to give people a reason to buy a physical copy of HTDAAB and not just download it, and that's why they made the super deluxe version. That plan might not work very well if they just released the regular version alone. And it would seem like they were doing a remaster of an album that had just come out a few months before, especially if they have actual remasters coming out around the same time (UF and AB, if the rumors are true).
dabiggestu2fan
Rock n' Roll Doggie
that would make me cry
I mean... the new album, TUF re-release, AB re-release, new album re-release + tour?
give me a break
$$$$$$$$
well then if you are worried about the money then don't buy them and problem solved. I for one hope they do that because lots of good U2 material in one year! esp the AB remaster!
Fullonedge3
The Fly
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2008
- Messages
- 298
Lazarus, you certainly could be right, but I'm also not sure the quote is implying that the half of the material that came out of the Fez sessions "fully-formed" is all that came out the sessions with Brian and Danny. Wasn't there an article that said they came up with a ton of ideas while in Fez? If that was the case, I'd be inclined to believe the material that came out of Fez not fully formed would have been kicked around quite a bit in the meantime.
In addition, everything we've heard so far indicates a movement away from the sound of Bomb. This is why I'm skeptical that we're going to get reworked leftovers from the Bomb sessions on this album. If anything, maybe Rubin worked on some of their Bomb leftovers.
With that said, I do love Mercy and wish that it will get a proper release some day.
In addition, everything we've heard so far indicates a movement away from the sound of Bomb. This is why I'm skeptical that we're going to get reworked leftovers from the Bomb sessions on this album. If anything, maybe Rubin worked on some of their Bomb leftovers.
With that said, I do love Mercy and wish that it will get a proper release some day.
I hear this "two halves" part and am reminded of Pop: we got some unique (for U2) stuff like Mofo, we got some conventional Staring at the Sun. I don't know if that is and was a good thing or a bad thing.
And I've always thought one of U2's consistent traits with their albums is to have 10-12 tracks, 45-60 minutes. They're pretty good at dropping a solid album (which tracks make the cut are sometimes a different story). With Moment of Surrender being 7 and a half minutes the rules definitely change a bit, but I'm not sure it's worth throwing out "the playbook" to give 15 tracks or 60+ minutes a spin. You know, crazy new sounds and whatever, but it's still U2, some part of what they do works.
And I've always thought one of U2's consistent traits with their albums is to have 10-12 tracks, 45-60 minutes. They're pretty good at dropping a solid album (which tracks make the cut are sometimes a different story). With Moment of Surrender being 7 and a half minutes the rules definitely change a bit, but I'm not sure it's worth throwing out "the playbook" to give 15 tracks or 60+ minutes a spin. You know, crazy new sounds and whatever, but it's still U2, some part of what they do works.
luna_lovegood
War Child
I love that Moment of Surrender is 7 minutes long. Thats promising. More evidence that they're being experimental again.
Rob33
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Yeah, I agree....I especially have confidence in this record now that Edge himself has actually mentioned it...and he has confirmed it's 7+ minutes...I can't wait!!! What if we get another live epic like Bad? WOW
phommel
Refugee
"U2 albums never get finished; they just get released."
This is now already one of the most famous Edge-quotes ever! ;-)
This is now already one of the most famous Edge-quotes ever! ;-)
Well, I don't think *that* band would have released a 7 minute + long song either. That frame of 11 songs-circa 50 mins of runtime has served them for most of their career. That said, I don't want a bloated 70-80 mins single album (we got bloatedness two times already from them) - I'd rather see a double album with a concept. (though I admit I base this on nothing else but Edge's "two halves" talk, and on Iovine's note that the band said they need two more songs and the album will be "exactly what we have in mind" which seems to indicate they want to add to the theme of the album rather than just two more song or upping the quality of the album) I'm beginning to think Lanois is exaggerating the "innovative!" hype, though.
So if none of Rubin stuff made the cut, what is that other non-Eno/Lanois material they're working on ? All that.../Bomb leftovers ?7+ mis for MOS. 6+ mins for Mercy. I don't know...two songs that long on one album ? I'm all for Mercy seeing the light of day in some way and seeing what Eno and Lanois added to it, but I'm not sure they'd do two songs as long on a record. When was the last time that happened ? Zooropa and Lemon ?
Vlad n U 2
Blue Crack Addict
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2008
- Messages
- 28,386
Moment of Surrender, 7 1/2 minutes, 
.
Unknown caller,
New album probably will be
Just release the damn album though.
.Unknown caller,
New album probably will be
Just release the damn album though.
Aygo
Rock n' Roll Doggie
What's the problem of two songs having a big lenght on the album? On Madonna's last record, two songs have more than 6 minutes (and that happened in other albums of her before too) and it didn't interfer with the conception of the album or its commercial success.Well, I don't think *that* band would have released a 7 minute + long song either. That frame of 11 songs-circa 50 mins of runtime has served them for most of their career. That said, I don't want a bloated 70-80 mins single album (we got bloatedness two times already from them) - I'd rather see a double album with a concept. (though I admit I base this on nothing else but Edge's "two halves" talk, and on Iovine's note that the band said they need two more songs and the album will be "exactly what we have in mind" which seems to indicate they want to add to the theme of the album rather than just two more song or upping the quality of the album) I'm beginning to think Lanois is exaggerating the "innovative!" hype, though.
7+ mis for MOS. 6+ mins for Mercy. I don't know...two songs that long on one album ? I'm all for Mercy seeing the light of day in some way and seeing what Eno and Lanois added to it, but I'm not sure they'd do two songs as long on a record. When was the last time that happened ? Zooropa and Lemon ?
It's not about quantity (lenght, in this case), it's about quality.
If it's gonna be a 60 minutes/10 track album with an average of 6 minutes each song, what's the deal? As long as the album is great, it's okay.
buzzkill27
War Child
The problem is it one long song just may cancel out the other one. The "we need two more songs and the album will be just what we have in mind" line Jimmy Iovine got makes me think it's not about quantity or quality...it's probably more like they needed two songs to match the overall theme of the album.
10 6 minute long songs ? I don't see them doing that, and I sincerely hope we're getting more than 10 songs after the longest wait in their history.
gvox
Ghost of Love
PowerSurge
New Yorker
Yeah and No.
Since when does the LENGTH of a song have anything to do with how "EXPERIMENTAL" it is?
I'm just saying...because I've heard a bunch of long overdone unexperimental straight forward rock songs before and hated them. Have we forgotten how common the super long and pretentious rock song was in the 60's and 70's? I can think of so many rock songs with super extended intros and outros that could easily have been cut down by 2-3 minutes.
For all we know this MOS could be a straight forward song with a huge long synth or keyboard intro and outro. Don't get me wrong, I'm excited about it but I'm not jumping on the whole experimental band wagon just yet.
Acrobat51829
War Child
luna_lovegood
War Child
I agree, the length doesn't directly have to do with how experimental a song is. However, often, when artists write songs that exeed the normal 2-4 minutes its because they are, pardon the cliche, but getting lost in the music, and really capitaling on the sound and the atmosphere rather than the song ... if that makes sense. I know I was generalising, but often songs that are shorter or longer than the conventional length are more interesting. And couple the length of the song with Edges quote about having a hanful of songs that were recorded as "raw moments of creativity" or whatever he said - I think this album sounds like it may have been approached in a more interesting way than the last few.
LemonMelon
More 5G Than Man
Indeed. Ask Oasis about this.
dan_smee
ONE love, blood, life
snap!
PowerSurge
New Yorker
Maybe it's one chord played over and over again for seven and a half minutes.
H chord
HA!
thanks for the laugh, I needed that
PowerSurge
New Yorker
Very true.
There is a reason why most rock songs fall within the 3-4 minute mark....it takes some talent and originality to come up with another 2-3 minutes more of a song that doesn't sound like just 2-3 minutes of filler.
Hopefully, our Irish friends accomplished that with MOS.
Similar threads
