cobl04
45:33
Why would any of you want a 2012 re-recorded Pop? That would suck fucking balls.
disc 6 - The original album "finished" - re-recorded in 2012.
I don't actually think it needs finishing. "It wasn't finished (b/c we didn't have enough time b/c of deadlines etc. etc.)" is the hogwash U2 are always telling us (and indeed, themselves) if an album didn't sell as well as they'd planned. Quite arrogantly, if you ask me. As if every musical idea sprouting in their minds is a potential chart breaker and low sales must mean that the idea is still genius, it just "wasn't finished".
Instead, might the reason that Pop wasn't a huge commercial success, and indeed, not a favourite of many fans, just be that the concept didn't work?
Paul McGuinness in fact says in U2 by U2: "Pop is always described as the album that didn't get enough time to get finished. It got an awful lot of time, actually."
So I wouldn't want a "finished" / re-recorded version of the album myself. I quite like Pop the way it is, in fact.
Except that Pop actually ISN"T finished. You can hear fairly large editing and splicing mistakes throughout the album, so it's pretty obvious it was a rush job.
While I accept that some people who do in fact notice editing mistakes in the album might want a version without them, personally I have no reason for wanting a "finished" Pop.
BVS said:Except that Pop actually ISN"T finished. You can hear fairly large editing and splicing mistakes throughout the album, so it's pretty obvious it was a rush job.
I don't think anyone was suggesting that...A remaster would not fix this.
Other than that Pop is perfect.
BVS said:I don't think anyone was suggesting that...
Ummmm, no. It's great, but not perfect.
It's not that, it's the fact that if a band like U2 released an album with big editing mistakes like that in LNOE you know it was rushed. Why were the liner notes printed before the album was actually finished? Why were some of the single mixes superior to the album cuts?
I mean, other than that hiccup, from a technical point of view, it's perfect.
BVS said:There is an old thread somewhere in the archives where people pointed out the multiple editing and recording mistakes on Pop, but I wouldn't know where to start looking for it.
No, there was actual recording still going on after the fact. Not re-recording, but still laying down choruses, etc. This is well documented.Going out on a limb here, but I can fully imagine that that might be because, U2 being U2, they had an already finished product (for which liner notes were already printed) and at the last moment they decided it wasn't good enough and rushed through some changes.
Going out on a limb here, but I bet Larry would disagree with you. Bono seems to be the only one that actually believed they had a ready to release album.And Songs of Ascent was already announced to the public, including the title of its first single, with the band eventually cancelling its release because they felt it was not the right thing to put out as the next U2 album.
SoA wasn't actually officially announced, nor was the title of its first single. Which was that anyway?
Also, Pop was actually still being recorded when the tour was starting. It wasn't out for... later that month I think. They actually laid down some choruses in a hotel bathroom.
Well, I guess the record label hadn't made an official announcement for SoA, but the band & Paul McGuinness were presenting its release as something that was going to happen, even saying in which month is was due to be released. They gave "Every Breaking Wave" as the title for its first single in Rolling Stone (link).
Galeongirl said:Also, Pop was actually still being recorded when the tour was starting. It wasn't out for... later that month I think. They actually laid down some choruses in a hotel bathroom.
That would be Zooropa that you're thinking of.
Well, I guess the record label hadn't made an official announcement for SoA, but the band & Paul McGuinness were presenting its release as something that was going to happen, even saying in which month is was due to be released. They gave "Every Breaking Wave" as the title for its first single in Rolling Stone (link).
On numerous occasions, Paul McGuinness has himself given the press likely release dates. Wikipedia has some citations on this.
In April 2010, U2's manager Paul McGuinness confirmed that the album would not be finished by June, but indicated that a release "before the end of the year is increasingly likely."[43] In October 2010, Bono stated that the new album would be produced by Danger Mouse, and that 12 songs had been completed. He also noted that U2 were working on a potential album of club music in the spirit of "U2's remixes in the 1990s".[44] McGuinness said the next album was slated for an early 2011 release.[45] In December 2010, Will.i.am confirmed that he will be co-producing the next release with Danger Mouse.[46] In February 2011, McGuinness stated that the album was almost complete, giving it a tentative release date of May 2011, although he noted that Songs of Ascent was no longer the likely title.[47]
cobl04 said:Shut up elfa.
/bomac
Those were all unofficial statements being gathered by RS. Or are you telling me we should take all press releases now serious and prepare for U2's imminent break up?