1. Originally posted by EyesWithPrideB3:[..]

    If I had a gun with three bullets, and I was in a room with every U2 song ever written, I'd shoot Glastonbury first.

    Then I'd shoot it again, with the second bullet, to make sure it was dead.

    (Then I'd probably shoot Jesus Christ)


    You're all haters...
  2. Originally posted by JRlovesU2:[..]

    SOA is said to be a contemplative album, so NS and EBW should fit in perfectly well.

    Danger Mouse is said to be producing the "club album", and neither one of NS or EBW can be described as a floorfiler in a club. So I guess Danger Mouse will be producing an entire new collection of songs.



    Danger Mouse is doing the "rock" album.
  3. You guys are really still buying this whole "multiple albums" thing here, eh?


  4. We probably see a statement soon saying that 'U2 is thinking of scratching all their material and going back to the drawingboard'. An album could come in 2012..
  5. I'm somewhat convinced that they'll have at least a tour EP out by/during the North American leg, but this whole three albums thing is nonsense and garbage. They'll either combine the styles into a slightly longer album, a la Rattle and Hum, or the other projects will be released "at a later date", meaning it'll just be their next album. There is no way they're releasing three (or even two) albums at the same time.

    If they do, I will eat my hat. Write it down.


  6. Why do you all hate Glastonbury? - It's good quick rock song. I love it more than EBW and North Star - they aren't a songs yet, just an embryos of songs. When they will be full band with arrangements, they will be maybe good songs. Stingray Guitar is full song for me and I will love it if it will be on the album.


  7. I wouldn't say it as if we're all gullible, it's just the band and even Paul are selling the idea extremely well. Not to mention we keep hearing about multiple producers, so what does it all mean? I'm with you in that I can see a one album project in the future much more likely, and I'd much rather prefer that, but all we can do right now is discuss what the band has been discussing, and that's all we're doing!

    Alex
  8. True- I don't mean to be a big downer or criticize the conversation. But I'd much rather them take the best 5 tracks from each of the three albums, collaborate with all the different producers, transition the tracks to sequence the album very fluidly, and put out the best thing they've possibly ever released since Achtung Baby, rather than get 3 albums split 60/20/20 (Good/Decent/Crap)
  9. Originally posted by EyesWithPrideB3:True- I don't mean to be a big downer or criticize the conversation. But I'd much rather them take the best 5 tracks from each of the three albums, collaborate with all the different producers, transition the tracks to sequence the album very fluidly, and put out the best thing they've possibly ever released since Achtung Baby, rather than get 3 albums split 60/20/20 (Good/Decent/Crap)


    That could work. BUT: what you consider crap could very well be a song that I absolutely love. For instance, not many people like Cedars of Lebanon, I really really like it. For me, it's one of the U2 gems.

    Other people seem to love Winter. I think it's crap, in both versions.

    So if they release 3 albums, we can all pick out our own favourites. I know I would instantly buy all three of them and find my own way through these albums...