GEN
Active topics


  2. it will more or less be 5 years though when the new album comes out, just due to the fact that its coming out next year (better not be a full 5 years tho )
  3. Originally posted by thefly07:[..]

    it will more or less be 5 years though when the new album comes out, just due to the fact that its coming out next year (better not be a full 5 years tho )


    i think if it actually came out the 5th anniversary i would simply walk out on them for a while and protest the album because its obsurd that they keep delaying it and stringing us along. IT NEEDS TO BE RELEASED BY APRIL!!! or else.....
  4. Originally posted by Genaro92U2:[..]

    i think if it actually came out the 5th anniversary i would simply walk out on them for a while and protest the album because its obsurd that they keep delaying it and stringing us along. IT NEEDS TO BE RELEASED BY APRIL!!! or else.....


    Be glad they're not Guns 'N Roses, then. It took them 13 years...for what?
  5. Originally posted by Genaro92U2:[..]

    i think if it actually came out the 5th anniversary i would simply walk out on them for a while and protest the album because its obsurd that they keep delaying it and stringing us along. IT NEEDS TO BE RELEASED BY APRIL!!! or else.....


    agreed, even an April release would not sit well with me


  6. Instead of a double album, why not use all the songs from the sessions?

    15 songs per disc = a quadruple release! I like that idea.


  7. yea! the most annoying part is that there are so many different statements from them saying that like "oh yea we are almost done" and then BAM a delay! what happened to the almost done? Lol at least some bands that take forever say it from the start and dont keep pushing back. idk thats what i think. STOP PUSHING IT BACK U2!! imma get you!! haha
  8. its only been pushed back once. and if u2 want to keep writing songs lets let them, the more songs for them to choose from the better.
  9. Originally posted by FranckPT:its only been pushed back once. and if u2 want to keep writing songs lets let them, the more songs for them to choose from the better.


    i know i'm just eager and impatient


  10. Aren't we all.

    I still like my quad-album idea though, and I've been thinking about it. Four seasons in a year - do a seasonal release - fuck the website, fuck Fanfire, no iTunes / Amazon - do it yourselves. Not everyone has access to the internet, or high-speed internet or wants to take up a U2.com account (I certainly don't) or deal with the shambles that is FanFire (again, I don't). Happy songs in Summer, slowish songs in Autumn, the rock songs in Winter and the melodies in Spring, all while U2 are on tour, and then play the songs from each season on each leg of the tour, if they're gonna do four. US / Europe / South America / Pacific, or release a fifth disc, full of demos and B-sides (only 10 or so) if there will be a fifth leg.

    Don't release singles - that idea's old-hat; release it as an anthology set. Not only would it be another first, we'd have plenty of new material to keep us going for ages, and wouldn't get so bored of 11 or 12 songs so quickly, and make the albums tie in like a story, which the fans can follow. And for the album artwork, have it like the Achtung singles, where you join the single covers together and see a huge picture of something; it could be something that the anthology represents overall, like love or togetherness.

    60+ songs sounds like a good deal to me, but then people will argue because of the pricing and the pumping out of material so quickly, they'll have a whinge about it being left-overs that probably weren't that good to start with - a lot of demos aren't up to scratch, but just release them, untouched and rough and show the world what they've been doing for the last few years. Imagine each song being five or six minutes long. On average, you would have a whole CD (80 minutes) worth, so over four hours of material, easily. Not every song has to be a hit, but make at least 75% of the album worthy of listening. Then they can put out two new remasters every three months, with four demos per album as well as all the B-sides. A DVD won't matter - unless it's an important album like Achtung Baby, or it already has a DVD - because of the vast majority of new material we'll be getting each season.

    Quincy Jones once said you can't put 33 songs on an album, but you can if you do it in stages. Anyone thought about this sort of idea?
  11. I like it drew...a lot...would be a dream for me...But surely Yeah will show up soon with some 'nice' comments about it It will be new and controversial maybe, and that would be a cool new idea, love it!
  12. 4 hours long CD? that would be like tantric sex lol (not that I have some experience in stuff like that )
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.