Songs of Ascent V - The Final Bell

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.
I just found this in Mojo website:

Brian Eno Documentary Screens - News - Mojo

"In 2008, Eno teamed up with Talking Heads pal David Byrne to release Everything That Happens Will Happen Today. He has recently been working on U2's forthcoming Songs Of Ascent. "

:wave:

Sweet. :up:


I still don't understand the EP talk. We know they have enough tracks.

The quantity of tracks isn't in question. What is in question is how many tracks there are that the band feels comfortable releasing. Based on what has been left to b-sides and the remasters/Complete U2 unreleased tracks, there is sometimes a major difference in the fanbase and band's opinion on what belongs on an album. :wink:
 
Sweet. :up:

The quantity of tracks isn't in question. What is in question is how many tracks there are that the band feels comfortable releasing. Based on what has been left to b-sides and the remasters/Complete U2 unreleased tracks, there is sometimes a major difference in the fanbase and band's opinion on what belongs on an album. :wink:

I don't understand your point. What would have made them change their mind about non-single tracks being worth releasing or not releasing? It seems clear that they have a large number of tracks that they feel are worth being on an album, the right singles seems to be the question, right?
 
you bet. it definitely means that they're working hard. realistically, they have until about the end of February to finish the album if they want it out by the beginning of the tour.

Ordinarily, I'd agree with this. But I imagine the press on this album won't be as intense or as long of a build up as it was for No Net. Plus they'll be too busy rehearsing for the real tour to do any kind of multi-city promo run. So it's certainly POSSIBLE for them to release it a couple months after finishing it. I know this was a long time ago, but Cockropa was finished in May and in the stores by July. It can be done.
 
It seems to me that it would have taken longer to press and ramp up promotion in 1993, and Zooropa was finished in May and out in July of that year, and that was an entire album being written/recorded, so I wouldn't worry about deadlines right now.
 
this is how bad we're hanging on each word, isn't it? :lol:

:wink:

We've been doing this since the 2006 sessions, the actual release of NLOTH was buried in more expectation since word of SOA was there before NLOTH even came out.
 
it was pretty bad in September '08 when everyone was expecting the album in a couple months, and we weren't getting any news. finally, Bono announced that the album wouldn't be out till 2009.

Yes, sir!

That sucked!

I remember taking about a 2 month long blue crack hiatus after that. My U2 news would consist of looking them up in google news once per week to make sure I didn't miss anything big.
 
Did anyone reflect on the stuff that ended up not being used from Adams videoclips?
"Riad" - The song with a heavy influence from the rhythm section from Here Is What Is
"Edgeback 1" - The sort of "In A Little While"/blues-like riff played unplugged on the White Falcon guitar
"Edgeback 4" - Sounds like it is a part of Being Born, but the melody seems different.
"Adam Bass" - This one had a Zoo Station-like intro, which might've been from Sexy Boots as it was known at the time, but could be something else too.
"Larry In The Studio" - or as Brian and Danny puts it; "Mariachi"
"Motorcycle" - Some unindentified glockenspiel melody.
"Edge Funk" - Edge plays a peculiar bluesy song to a delighted Adam while in Eze .
"Riad 2" - Continuation from the song being worked on in the first example. Heard in the first clip uploaded by The Observer.
"Lanois Jam" - From New York's Platinum Studios, heard in the second video from The Observer.

Any ideas? Will these show up anywhere do you think?
 
Really, if U2 wanted to wait until the last minute to finish the album, they could just do like Radiohead did and release the album online first, then bring out the CD later, as time allows for mass production of CDs to happen. I honestly don't care how I get it, as long as I get new U2 music to my ears! I'm not sure how early U2 will need to start rehearsing for the tour. They probably won't require as much rehearsal time, since this is the same stage, and I expect the show will be 3/4 the same as it was in 2009. Hopefully they finish the album in time for a June release. It doesn't seem like this is going to be a very lucrative year for bands I like releasing albums, so I need this.
 
"Adam Bass" - This one had a Zoo Station-like intro, which might've been from Sexy Boots as it was known at the time, but could be something else too.
"Larry In The Studio" - or as Brian and Danny puts it; "Mariachi"

I suspect pretty strongly that the strange sounds in the Adam Bass clip must have been part of Sexy Boots, as you can hear him play the main riff from the song near the end if you listen closely.

The music from the Larryinstudio clip is by far the most intriguing to me out of any of the little snippets we've heard that didn't surface on NLOTH. I really hope we get to hear whatever song that was from... if it hasn't been reworked, that is.

http://media.u2.com/flash/highlights/larryinstudio.swf
 
I don't understand your point. What would have made them change their mind about non-single tracks being worth releasing or not releasing? It seems clear that they have a large number of tracks that they feel are worth being on an album, the right singles seems to be the question, right?

What I'm saying is that we don't actually know how many tracks there are that the band feels are worthy of a place on an album. There are many examples of tracks in the past that the fanbase feel are worthy of being on an album while the band did not. The band are their own biggest critics. They may have lots of songs but I think you make the false assumption that they feel all of these tracks are album worthy. We simply don't know either way yet. SOA's fate will probably rest not in the overall number of tracks they have but the number of tracks they feel are worthy of a spot on an album. That's the point I'm making.
 
The band may be their own biggest critics, but the notion that they have the best taste or judgement in their own material (something often suggested by the sycophantic mousketeers on this forum), at least at this point in their career, is ridiculous.
 
Really, if U2 wanted to wait until the last minute to finish the album, they could just do like Radiohead did and release the album online first, then bring out the CD later, as time allows for mass production of CDs to happen.

$rcooge McDuck will never, ever let this happen.
 
so, I don't know much about Paul McGuiness, but it seems the general consensus here is that he pretty much cares more about money than quality music? If that is true, it is unfortunate. I would love to see U2 start to at least seem to care less about profit, like radiohead has been doing, without sacrificing experimentation and exploring new boundaries of sonic soundscape. That being said, I am sure we will still see at least half of SOA have an "experimental" quality to it because keep in mind that many of the songs have already been written or at least have some sort of origin from the NLOTH sessions.
so anyways... who else here cant wait for the thousands of leak threads that will start to pop up!? haha :doh: :D
 
Manager caring about the finances of the band ? $hocking...but he does not make the musical decisions. I guess the band's view of what belongs on the album (no one is perfect) is different in some cases compared to (interference) fanbase, but to me there are only 3 mistakes they made: Hold me thrill me kiss me kill me, Ground beneath her feet and Stateless not making it on a U2 album.

Maybe the band will try that "digital album release" - remember that rumour that a U2 album would be one of the first digital only releases a while ago ? U2 likes to get involved with cutting edge technology so that would be right up their alley - plus it buys them more time to work on the album as all the promotion, the actual CD pressing etc isn't needed. Release it digitally on the eve of the 3rd leg and get a little extra media talk...and they did say the album would be out "by June". All they really need is a single in the Spring, which is what Bono already talked about.
 
Anyone have any idea why Intel might be talking about U2/Bono? :hmm: I know I'm grasping at straws here :wink:

Paul S. Otellini, President and CEO of Intel Corporation, delivers his keynote speech while standing in front of a projection of Irish rock musician Bono of U2 at the 2010 International Consumer Electronics Show (CES) in Las Vegas January 7, 2010. The show runs January 7-10.
 
Manager caring about the finances of the band ? $hocking...but he does not make the musical decisions. I guess the band's view of what belongs on the album (no one is perfect) is different in some cases compared to (interference) fanbase, but to me there are only 3 mistakes they made: Hold me thrill me kiss me kill me, Ground beneath her feet and Stateless not making it on a U2 album.

Maybe the band will try that "digital album release" - remember that rumour that a U2 album would be one of the first digital only releases a while ago ? U2 likes to get involved with cutting edge technology so that would be right up their alley - plus it buys them more time to work on the album as all the promotion, the actual CD pressing etc isn't needed. Release it digitally on the eve of the 3rd leg and get a little extra media talk...and they did say the album would be out "by June". All they really need is a single in the Spring, which is what Bono already talked about.

yeah, i couldn't agree more. i've always been bothered by the Paul McG bashing that goes on here. Paul has always been a business man. his job has always been to make money. he is very good at his job.
 
the notion that they have the best taste or judgement in their own material (something often suggested by the sycophantic mousketeers on this forum), at least at this point in their career, is ridiculous.

This is so much full of fail. People like you have obviously no idea at all about what art really is. Artists are critics that's the primary thing that they are because analysing what they want to create and knowing when they have reach that goal or not is what their job is all about. As a result if they are good artists so they are necessarily very good critics too but the opposite is also right : if you are not able to create anything worthy then you are obviously not good at all at analysing art too. So you're certainly the one who is ridiculous here. Criticizing is good that's what forums like this are about but please people be more humble when you are talking about artists that have proven so much. That doesn't mean that they can't be wrong but they certainly know much much better than you and me what they are doing.
 
yeah, i couldn't agree more. i've always been bothered by the Paul McG bashing that goes on here. Paul has always been a business man. his job has always been to make money. he is very good at his job.

:up:

He's a rarity in the business, in that he still maintains a close and trusted position with his "employers" 30-odd years into their relationship. If it weren't for the huge investments he made in them in the beginning (almost to the point of his personal bankruptcy) and his tenacity, I doubt we'd even be talking about them right now.

I love how he gets bashed for making money. Don't fool yourselves, if they wanted to, the band could easily veto any decisions he makes. If he's money-grubbing, they're even more so.
 
If it weren't for the huge investments he made in them in the beginning (almost to the point of his personal bankruptcy) and his tenacity, I doubt we'd even be talking about them right now.

This is interesting.
Where can I read more about this? I have several books from the band, but I have not read any of them for more than a few pages (Go figure). Is it in U2 By U2?
 
This is interesting.
Where can I read more about this? I have several books from the band, but I have not read any of them for more than a few pages (Go figure). Is it in U2 By U2?

The bio by Eamon Dunphy, Unforgettable Fire, has quite a long section about Paul. It's really interesting. I can't think of a better manager for them.

And I'm sure I've picked up bits and pieces about him from various other minor sources over the years, but that's the main one that comes to mind at the moment.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom