Question:
(snipped a bunch of cheese and whine) Excuse me but isn’t it a bit arrogant for you or anyone other than the band members to decide how long of a break they need/deserve? The recording and touring schedule was grueling. These men have families and friends and lives that were impacted because of their work. So if they want to take a long break and recharge, it’s their right. Are they on some sort of schedule or something? No. What they do is creative. You can’t crank that out like cans of spam. Passengers was a side road that they wanted to explore with Brian Eno. The new album is, in all likelihood, going to be a completely different route. They don’t owe us a certain number of albums on a certain time schedule. It’s hard for some fans to accept this concept – everybody gets impatient and wants a new album right now. Well, that’s tough.
Amen! I can’t stand people expecting bands (not only U2, but bands in general) to just pump out a record every year and have ‘x’ number of songs on it, with 1/3 being slow songs, 1/3 being hard rocking songs and the rest somewhere in the middle. It just DOESN’T work that way people. A songwriter may go through a creative spurt where he/she can write enough for two albums in a year, but then may go dry for a little while and just need to get away from it to get re-inspired again. I don’t mind U2 trying new things with music–fusing rock ‘n’ roll with techno, whatever….but I think when you take too long, you run the risk of overproducing….the new R.E.M. album is so amazing, and it is very off-the-cuff…you can have something that is spontaneous AND focused. I just hope the band hasn’t lost sight of what rock and roll is about. Achtung managed to pull it off…
No matter the record U2 puts out next, there are going to be people who hate it initially and slowly warm up to it (much like I personally was for Zooropa, though I woudln’t say I hated it ever), there’s going to be people who love it right off, and there’s going to be people who never do like it. No matter what! If they put the album out too soon, you’d be saying that they didn’t take enough time with it.. they just can’t win with everybody so they have to do what they feel is right in their heart, and follow that. I trust them to do it right and to release it when it’s ready. I trust their instincts and their talent. If you want to be a fan of a band that produces "product" on a schedule, you better find another band. Cheryl
Ditto that 
Rags
Response:
Let me start off by saying that I thought Passengers was brilliant (an opinion that, as I recall, was not widely shared on this group). Granted, the Beatles did not tour, but if you factor in the solo things that were happening (Harrison & Lennon’s solo musical projects, Lennon’s film "How I won the War"), the 3 film projects (Yellow Sub, Magical Mystery Tour, and Let it Be), along with trips to the Middle East, internal conflicts, etc., I still think it is hard to deny how prolific they were in that short period of time. I acknowledge that U2 put themselves through a very long and grueling tour, but once again, that is their job. Most people are working year-round, and don’t get more that a couple weeks of vacation. I think U2 should spend less time on making these rinky-dink songs for tribute albums, soundtracks, and TV specials, and more on the next album. As far as too many songs are concerned, just because the Smashing Pumpkins aren’t good enough to have a double album of good material doesn’t mean no one can. The White Album is in my opinion the best collection of songs the Beatles ever came up with, and isn’t "Exile on Main Street" still considered the Stones’ masterpiece. We all know how amazing most of U2’s b-sides are, and I don’t think it would be wrong in any way for them to release a longer or double album. Let’s all remember that we are talking about the best musical group in the world. If anybody has the right to release a lot of material, it’s them. You can make excuses all you want, and point out all kinds of side projects and other activities. But what it comes down to is that for 3 and a half years all we have to show for is an experimental album of mostly instrumentals and a handful of various artist album contributions. I think the fans have every right to be frustrated, regardless of the artist. I’m still optimistic about the results. Neal
Response:
[snip I don’t mind U2 trying new things with music–fusing rock ‘n’ roll with techno, whatever….but I think when you take too long, you run the risk of overproducing….the new R.E.M. album is so amazing, and it is very off-the-cuff…
Just sounds like a rehash of Monster and AFTP to me. you can have something that is spontaneous AND focused. I just hope the band hasn’t lost sight of what rock and roll is about. Achtung managed to pull it off…
And that took how long to produce? I think you just shot down your argument. Besides, do you know the `real’ reasons behind the bands so-called `delay’? If the inspiration isn’t there, then it isn’t there. You can’t `force’ music out of somebody. Gene
Response:
I don’t think having to put out an album a year (unless you are touring) is too much of a demand, considering, that’s ALL they’re doing. Between 1965 and 1970 the Beatles put out like 7 albums (one of them a double), which are considered some of the best albums of all time. The only reason you don’t see a lot of bands putting out yearly albums is because record companies won’t let them…they want to milk albums for as many singles as they can to make it go multi-platinum (see Alanis Morrissette).
(snip) Where does U2 fit in here? I would have to agree that they appear to me to be slacking a bit. After reading the Flanagan book I have a lot of respect for their attitudes behind the scenes, but I don’t think they needed this long of a break post-ZooTv….Passengers was not some major project that totally drained them…it should have been a very brief springboard for the new album.
Excuse me but isn’t it a bit arrogant for you or anyone other than the band members to decide how long of a break they need/deserve? The recording and touring schedule was grueling. These men have families and friends and lives that were impacted because of their work. So if they want to take a long break and recharge, it’s their right. Are they on some sort of schedule or something? No. What they do is creative. You can’t crank that out like cans of spam. Passengers was a side road that they wanted to explore with Brian Eno. The new album is, in all likelihood, going to be a completely different route. They don’t owe us a certain number of albums on a certain time schedule. It’s hard for some fans to accept this concept – everybody gets impatient and wants a new album right now. Well, that’s tough. I don’t mind U2 trying new things with music–fusing rock ‘n’ roll with techno, whatever….but I think when you take too long, you run the risk of overproducing….the new R.E.M. album is so amazing, and it is very off-the-cuff…you can have something that is spontaneous AND focused. I just hope the band hasn’t lost sight of what rock and roll is about. Achtung managed to pull it off…
I trust them to do it right and to release it when it’s ready. I trust their instincts and their talent. If you want to be a fan of a band that produces "product" on a schedule, you better find another band. Cheryl
Response:
: I don’t think having to put out an album a year (unless you are touring) : is too much of a demand, considering, that’s ALL they’re doing. Between : 1965 and 1970 the Beatles put out like 7 albums (one of them a double), : which are considered some of the best albums of all time. The only reason But you hit the "nail right on the head" there! During those years, the Beatles did NOT tour (I think they stopped touring some time in ‘65). When U2 tours, they usually go on a "mega-tour." The JT/R&H tour went from 4/87 all the way to 1/90! Granted, there were breaks, but I’m sure you can see how exhausting almost 3 years of touring would be! A group like R.E.M. or the Beatles should be able to produce an album a year when not on tour. But once touring starts, this naturally slows down. Granted, early on the Beatles released numerous albums while touring, but so did U2. However, as the music for BOTH bands became more intricate, the work became more involved. Since the Beatles stopped touring, they could work only on the album. U2 not only has continued to tour, but they also must "recover" from that tour! The ZOO tours went from 2/92 to late in 11/93. Again, there was a small break, but touring around the world takes it’s toll. These men have families you know! And, during both of the above tours, U2 released a follow-up album (R&H and Zooropa) to their "original" touring album (JT and AB). : you don’t see a lot of bands putting out yearly albums is because record : companies won’t let them…they want to milk albums for as many singles as : they can to make it go multi-platinum (see Alanis Morrissette). True, but I don’t know if this necessarily means that artists postpone new material or not. After all, U2 released R&H and Zooropa only a year and a half after their two "BIG" releases. JT was still on the charts when R&H was released! : Now there are some artists who are fighting this. Prince, for example. : That’s primarily why he’s no longer with Warnes Bros; because they : wouldn’t let him release what he wanted whenever he wanted to. Well : according to Rolling Stone, he is putting out a TRIPLE album this fall, : and following it with another album next year. This guy has a backlog of a : songs longer than an unspooled roll of toilet tissue. O.K., but I think just about any artist that’s been around for that long has this "backlog" of songs. The question is whether these songs are good enough to release. Many people questioned the song quality on the Smashing Pumpkins recent double album. Currently, these newsgroups are debating the quality of U2’s double album R&H. Will Prince’s TRIPLE album really be worth all that he thinks it is??? Currently, U2 are rumored to have about 30 songs that they can feature on this next album. However, are ALL of these songs "quality" songs? This is probably one of the reasons why U2 are working extra hard. They could release a double or triple album – but would they be happy with it? Would we be happy with it? I’d rather wait an extra few months and enjoy some GREAT music than rush and hear subpar songs. : Where does U2 fit in here? I would have to agree that they appear to me to : be slacking a bit. After reading the Flanagan book I have a lot of respect : for their attitudes behind the scenes, but I don’t think they needed this : long of a break post-ZooTv….Passengers was not some major project that : totally drained them…it should have been a very brief springboard for : the new album. I disagree. While Bono may not have been heavily involved in the Passengers due to the limited lyrics and simple singing, the other members were. The Edge was involved extensively in this project. And like Prince, they now have enough material to release several more Passengers’ albums if they desire. Also, during the hiatus between "Zooropa" and this upcoming album, U2 have been quite busy – far more so than they were during the hiatus between R&H and AB where only "Night and Day" was released. Since "Zooropa" U2 or U2 members have been involved in many projects: 1) Can’t Help Falling in Love – Bono 2) In the Name of the Father – Bono 3) Hallelujah – Bono 4) Save the Children – Bono 5) Tomorrow – Bono and Adam 6) Two Shots of Happy, One Shot of Sad – Bono and the Edge 7) Hold Me, Thrill Me, Kiss Me, Kill Me – U2 8) Mission: Impossible – Larry and Adam Include the Passengers album (!), some side projects (I believe Adam and Larry appear as "guests" on another album) and perhaps even "Melon" and you can see that U2 have been VERY busy! Plus, they’ve appeared in the Modena concert with Pavarotti, so it’s not as if they haven’t even toured during this time! : I don’t mind U2 trying new things with music–fusing rock ‘n’ roll with : techno, whatever….but I think when you take too long, you run the risk : of overproducing….the new R.E.M. album is so amazing, and it is very : off-the-cuff…you can have something that is spontaneous AND focused. I : just hope the band hasn’t lost sight of what rock and roll is about. : Achtung managed to pull it off… True, but R.E.M. hasn’t altered their style NEARLY as much as U2 have over the years. This extra creativity takes time. Plus, would an album like "Monster" ever been made had it not been for a mega-group like U2 altering their style and releasing AB and "Zooropa?" What makes both bands a success in the 90’s is that they were able to make the transition from 80’s style music to a 90’s style. Just recall that R.E.M. was able to release far more albums during the 80’s because they did NOT tour, whereas U2 were almost constantly on tour. R.E.M. took a bit of time working on this last album because they were on tour. In some ways, this current R.E.M. album is an extension of their tour much like R&H and Zooropa were for U2. Following both of U2’s longest breaks came two EXCELLENT albums, namely JT and AB. I feel we are in for yet another treat. While U2 sometimes do overproduce (I feel that this is the major flaw with both JT and AB), it’s far better that they release something that THEY are comfortable with than rush a release. I’m not sure why you doubt U2 though. You stated that AB was able to "pull-off that rock-n-roll sound" despite a long break. Therefore, why doubt them now? Ciao, John
Response:
I don’t think having to put out an album a year (unless you are touring) is too much of a demand, considering, that’s ALL they’re doing. Between 1965 and 1970 the Beatles put out like 7 albums (one of them a double), which are considered some of the best albums of all time. The only reason you don’t see a lot of bands putting out yearly albums is because record companies won’t let them…they want to milk albums for as many singles as they can to make it go multi-platinum (see Alanis Morrissette). Now there are some artists who are fighting this. Prince, for example. That’s primarily why he’s no longer with Warnes Bros; because they wouldn’t let him release what he wanted whenever he wanted to. Well according to Rolling Stone, he is putting out a TRIPLE album this fall, and following it with another album next year. This guy has a backlog of a songs longer than an unspooled roll of toilet tissue. Where does U2 fit in here? I would have to agree that they appear to me to be slacking a bit. After reading the Flanagan book I have a lot of respect for their attitudes behind the scenes, but I don’t think they needed this long of a break post-ZooTv….Passengers was not some major project that totally drained them…it should have been a very brief springboard for the new album. I don’t mind U2 trying new things with music–fusing rock ‘n’ roll with techno, whatever….but I think when you take too long, you run the risk of overproducing….the new R.E.M. album is so amazing, and it is very off-the-cuff…you can have something that is spontaneous AND focused. I just hope the band hasn’t lost sight of what rock and roll is about. Achtung managed to pull it off… Neal
Response:
says… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’m a long time U2 fan (beginning when I bought Unforgettable Fire when it came out in ‘84) who is growing slightly disillusioned by the length of time between U2 albums. Frankly, I liked the schedule of the early 80’s a lot more. – (Bono and Edge are sitting in their posh Dublin office suite, chomping cigars and wearing business suits. The year is 1995.) Bono: Edge old boy, have you got the schedule there? Edge: Righto, Bono, I’ll just look that up for you. (Edge digs through a file marked "schedule") Edge: Ah, here ’tis, friend. (hands it to Bono) Bono: (perusing schedule) Aha! Just as I thought. We’re not due to release another recording until early 1997. Might as well take some time off, old chap. Edge: Well, I did have these twenty or so new tunes ready to record, but I daresay I could use some practice at me golf game. Think I’ll trot off to Scotland for a year or so. (Edge exits. Bono leans back in chair and laughs.) Bono: Well, this oughta piss off that damned Behemoth fellow for awhile! HAHAHAHAHA! (Curtain) Bravo! Bravo! Encore…. Christopher J Freeman
Don’t bands too often put out sud-standard crap in the push to get an album out on a scheduled basis? Creativity (good creativity that is) cannot be put out on an assembly line, deadline basis. I think often when bands start out, they have a backlog of material that they have accumulated from years of working before they are "discovered". This is what you hear in the first few albums and it’s new and good because they took their time to create it. Then subsequent albums are created assembly line, on demand style and that’s when the band starts to suck and everyone moves on to the latest new band. Remember: "We’re just knocked out, we heard about the sellout, You’ve gotta get an album out, you owe it to the people, we’re so happy we can hardly count".(Have a Cigar – Pink Floyd) Perhaps it takes U2 longer because they’re actually attempting to continue to put out quality music instead of cookie-cutter crap.
Response:
Don’t bands too often put out sud-standard crap in the push to get an album out on a scheduled basis? Creativity (good creativity that is) cannot be put out on an assembly line, deadline basis. I think often when bands start out, they have a backlog of material that they have accumulated from years of working before they are "discovered". This is what you hear in the first few albums and it’s new and good because they took their time to create it. Then subsequent albums are created assembly line, on demand style and that’s when the band starts to suck and everyone moves on to the latest new band. Remember: "We’re just knocked out, we heard about the sellout, You’ve gotta get an album out, you owe it to the people, we’re so happy we can hardly count".(Have a Cigar – Pink Floyd) Perhaps it takes U2 longer because they’re actually attempting to continue to put out quality music instead of cookie-cutter crap.
I agree. The intitial rumors for the upcoming U2 album release date started a LONG time ago. I first heard that U2 was to release the album this PAST January (1996). Then last summer, then October, then November and now Feb., 1997. Out of all of those rumors, only the November and February ones contain(ed) any truth. Recall, just last year, U2, as part of the Passengers, released "Original Soundtracks 1." So, it was HIGHLY unlikely that they would then release an U2 album so shortly thereafter. Even though OS1 was not a major hit here in the U.S., it did do well in Europe (I blame that on the complete lack of marketing here in the U.S. for that album). U2 began to officially work on their new album only this year! So that pretty much eliminated all summer releases. The November release was set until U2 decided to rework some of their songs. This just proves what was stated above. U2 could have released anything just to appease the fans, but they wanted to release music that *they* were happy with. I think this is far more important. Since U2 try to stay "fresh" and look for new ways to express themselves musically, I feel this also takes longer. Recall, it took 3 years for JT to be released and another 3 before AB was released. Few would complain about how great those albums are. So, perhaps this 3 year hiatus is a good thing. Ciao, John
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’m a long time U2 fan (beginning when I bought Unforgettable Fire when it came out in ‘84) who is growing slightly disillusioned by the length of time between U2 albums. Frankly, I liked the schedule of the early 80’s a lot more. (Bono and Edge are sitting in their posh Dublin office suite, chomping cigars and wearing business suits. The year is 1995.) Bono: Edge old boy, have you got the schedule there? Edge: Righto, Bono, I’ll just look that up for you. (Edge digs through a file marked "schedule") Edge: Ah, here ’tis, friend. (hands it to Bono) Bono: (perusing schedule) Aha! Just as I thought. We’re not due to release another recording until early 1997. Might as well take some time off, old chap. Edge: Well, I did have these twenty or so new tunes ready to record, but I daresay I could use some practice at me golf game. Think I’ll trot off to Scotland for a year or so. (Edge exits. Bono leans back in chair and laughs.) Bono: Well, this oughta piss off that damned Behemoth fellow for awhile! HAHAHAHAHA! (Curtain)
That was a brillant piece of work Paul.Laughed my ass off.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’m a long time U2 fan (beginning when I bought Unforgettable Fire when it came out in ‘84) who is growing slightly disillusioned by the length of time between U2 albums. Frankly, I liked the schedule of the early 80’s a lot more. – (Bono and Edge are sitting in their posh Dublin office suite, chomping cigars and wearing business suits. The year is 1995.) Bono: Edge old boy, have you got the schedule there? Edge: Righto, Bono, I’ll just look that up for you. (Edge digs through a file marked "schedule") Edge: Ah, here ’tis, friend. (hands it to Bono) Bono: (perusing schedule) Aha! Just as I thought. We’re not due to release another recording until early 1997. Might as well take some time off, old chap. Edge: Well, I did have these twenty or so new tunes ready to record, but I daresay I could use some practice at me golf game. Think I’ll trot off to Scotland for a year or so. (Edge exits. Bono leans back in chair and laughs.) Bono: Well, this oughta piss off that damned Behemoth fellow for awhile! HAHAHAHAHA! (Curtain)
Bravo! Bravo! Encore…. Christopher J Freeman
Response:
I’m a long time U2 fan (beginning when I bought Unforgettable Fire when it came out in ‘84) who is growing slightly disillusioned by the length of time between U2 albums. I remember being irritated to have to wait from ‘85 (Wide Awake in America–a slim e.p.) until fall ‘87 for Joshua Tree. After Rattle and Hum in ‘88, another three year wait until Achtung Baby in ‘91. When Zooropa came out in ‘93, the press hyped up the fact that it was an "in-between" real albums project. Now it will be ‘97 before we get another one. What gives? Six years between major releases? The fans deserve better. Don’t get me wrong. I love Zooropa. But Zooropa, Rattle and Hum, Wide Awake in America, and Under a Blood Red Sky are all in the same vein: "in-between" albums meant to tide the fans over ’till the next one. Passengers doesn’t count–I’m sorry. It ain’t U2. If you doubt me, go listen to it and compare it with Achtung. So major U2 albums: ‘80 Boy ‘81 October ‘83 War ‘84 The Unforgettable Fire ‘87 The Joshua Tree ‘91 Achtung Baby Frankly, I liked the schedule of the early 80’s a lot more. Since the last major U2 album (Achtung), I’ve started and finished college. Come on, U2. Let’s quicken the pace. Every two years or you’re going to lose fans–not because the music isn’t any good (I think it’s continually improving), but because they lose interest after repeated five year shots of nothing. The Behemoth hath spoken.
Response:
The band is getting worse and worse. They had better change their ways.
: I’m a long time U2 fan (beginning when I bought Unforgettable Fire when : it came out in ‘84) who is growing slightly disillusioned by the length : of time between U2 albums. I remember being irritated to have to wait : from ‘85 (Wide Awake in America–a slim e.p.) until fall ‘87 for Joshua : Tree. After Rattle and Hum in ‘88, another three year wait until Achtung : Baby in ‘91. When Zooropa came out in ‘93, the press hyped up the fact : that it was an "in-between" real albums project. Now it will be ‘97 : before we get another one. What gives? Six years between major : releases? The fans deserve better. : Don’t get me wrong. I love Zooropa. But Zooropa, Rattle and Hum, Wide : Awake in America, and Under a Blood Red Sky are all in the same vein: : "in-between" albums meant to tide the fans over ’till the next one. : Passengers doesn’t count–I’m sorry. It ain’t U2. If you doubt me, go : listen to it and compare it with Achtung. So major U2 albums: : ‘80 Boy : ‘81 October : ‘83 War : ‘84 The Unforgettable Fire : ‘87 The Joshua Tree : ‘91 Achtung Baby : Frankly, I liked the schedule of the early 80’s a lot more. Since the : last major U2 album (Achtung), I’ve started and finished college. : Come on, U2. Let’s quicken the pace. Every two years or you’re going to : lose fans–not because the music isn’t any good (I think it’s continually : improving), but because they lose interest after repeated five year shots : of nothing. : The Behemoth hath spoken.
Response:
I’m a long time U2 fan (beginning when I bought Unforgettable Fire when it came out in ‘84) who is growing slightly disillusioned by the length of time between U2 albums. Frankly, I liked the schedule of the early 80’s a lot more.
(Bono and Edge are sitting in their posh Dublin office suite, chomping cigars and wearing business suits. The year is 1995.) Bono: Edge old boy, have you got the schedule there? Edge: Righto, Bono, I’ll just look that up for you. (Edge digs through a file marked "schedule") Edge: Ah, here ’tis, friend. (hands it to Bono) Bono: (perusing schedule) Aha! Just as I thought. We’re not due to release another recording until early 1997. Might as well take some time off, old chap. Edge: Well, I did have these twenty or so new tunes ready to record, but I daresay I could use some practice at me golf game. Think I’ll trot off to Scotland for a year or so. (Edge exits. Bono leans back in chair and laughs.) Bono: Well, this oughta piss off that damned Behemoth fellow for awhile! HAHAHAHAHA! (Curtain)
Response:
Posted in Hold Me | 
No Comments » | 
Anyway, the intention is good, the energy just needs a little redirecting. 
) 