Author Topic: a rare year, release-wise  (Read 2508 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline George

  • Stateless
  • *
  • Posts: 145
  • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9; Now it's time to rhyme!
a rare year, release-wise
« on: November 30, 2008, 09:05:27 AM »
At the beginning of the year, most of us probably thought that we'd have fistfuls of new U2 tracks with us.  We assumed there'd be an album's worth of material at least, and possibly something unreleased as part of U2.com's membership package.  Now that neither of those things will happen this year, we are in the situation where if U2 does not release a track this week on that RED site, this will be one of the rare years that no new track has been released, either commercially or promotionally, by the band.  2008 is their 30th year that they could have released something since they began putting out material in 1979.  Since then, only in 1986, 1994, and 1999 (as far as I can tell) has no new product been issued from them.

Here's to hoping that this won't be year number 4.



InThisHeartland

  • Guest
Re: a rare year, release-wise
« Reply #1 on: November 30, 2008, 09:52:42 AM »
Do the re-releases count? they have Angels Too Tied To The Ground, which has 2008 vocals. So even if we are being generous, we only got a new vocal track recorded this year.

Offline George

  • Stateless
  • *
  • Posts: 145
  • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9; Now it's time to rhyme!
Re: a rare year, release-wise
« Reply #2 on: November 30, 2008, 10:28:43 AM »
Good point.  I had filed all the re-releases under their respective original years.  I don't consider Angels to be a "new" track; rather I consider it more like Street Mission and the other two demos on the Boy re-release.  In some ways, though, they are new, so I guess 2008 is not as clear cut as the rest.

Offline God, Part II

  • Party Girl/Boy
  • **
  • Posts: 719
  • Rock and roll doggie!!!
Re: a rare year, release-wise
« Reply #3 on: November 30, 2008, 11:15:21 AM »
What about "The Ballad of Ronnie Drew"?  Sure, other bands contribute, but U2 is there, up front, in its entirety.  Oh, and in 1986, the band contributed "Maggie’s Farm (Live)" to the LIVE FOR IRELAND CD.
« Last Edit: November 30, 2008, 11:21:18 AM by God, Part II »

Offline THRILLHO

  • Holy Joe
  • ***
  • Posts: 17,361
  • The sun won't melt our wings tonight
Re: a rare year, release-wise
« Reply #4 on: December 01, 2008, 05:40:24 PM »
Woah, wait "Angels...." was 2008 vocals? Hmmm...guess i wasn't listening close enough.

InThisHeartland

  • Guest
Re: a rare year, release-wise
« Reply #5 on: December 01, 2008, 06:17:05 PM »
Well now we've got a Christmas cover, but that is still a cover. Hmmm

achtungchild

  • Guest
Re: a rare year, release-wise
« Reply #6 on: December 01, 2008, 06:20:08 PM »
Don't forget about "Wave Of Sorrow"  ;) even though I have absolutely no care for it.

InThisHeartland

  • Guest
Re: a rare year, release-wise
« Reply #7 on: December 01, 2008, 06:24:23 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Don't forget about "Wave Of Sorrow"  ;) even though I have absolutely no care for it.

I know im being really picky but that was 2007, right? well either way, that is a little bit new, just like "Angels..." and i really like both of those! very good!

Offline George

  • Stateless
  • *
  • Posts: 145
  • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9; Now it's time to rhyme!
Re: a rare year, release-wise
« Reply #8 on: December 01, 2008, 11:58:17 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I know im being really picky but that was 2007, right? well either way, that is a little bit new, just like "Angels..." and i really like both of those! very good!

It's not being really picky - it was 2007.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
What about "The Ballad of Ronnie Drew"?  Sure, other bands contribute, but U2 is there, up front, in its entirety.  Oh, and in 1986, the band contributed "Maggie’s Farm (Live)" to the LIVE FOR IRELAND CD.

As for The Ballad of Ronnie Drew, even though all of the members are there, there's just so many people on stage that it doesn't feel anything like a U2 track (unlike Passengers stuff).  I know their name is on the cover, but I just don't feel it.

Anyhow, it's all moot now because of the new (RED)WIRE track.

Offline God, Part II

  • Party Girl/Boy
  • **
  • Posts: 719
  • Rock and roll doggie!!!
Re: a rare year, release-wise
« Reply #9 on: December 02, 2008, 06:12:31 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As for The Ballad of Ronnie Drew...it doesn't feel anything like a U2 track

Some people used to say that about "The Fly"...then "Numb"...then "Lemon"...then "Discotheque"...

Offline George

  • Stateless
  • *
  • Posts: 145
  • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9; Now it's time to rhyme!
Re: a rare year, release-wise
« Reply #10 on: December 02, 2008, 08:34:47 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As for The Ballad of Ronnie Drew...it doesn't feel anything like a U2 track

Some people used to say that about "The Fly"...then "Numb"...then "Lemon"...then "Discotheque"...

Irrelevant.

You pretty much misquoted me.  You can only use "..." to cut out extraneous information.  What you cut out was, "there's just so many people on stage that it doesn't feel anything like a U2 track."  You cut out my point, my reasoning.  If U2 went to a football match and were part of the stadium crowd singing a chant for their club, you couldn't record it and call it a U2 song.  There would be too many other people "sharing the stage".  The same is true for The Ballad of Ronnie Drew, in my unhumble and correct opinion.

Offline God, Part II

  • Party Girl/Boy
  • **
  • Posts: 719
  • Rock and roll doggie!!!
Re: a rare year, release-wise
« Reply #11 on: December 02, 2008, 10:24:37 AM »
 :D LOL!  I disagree but, dammit, I sure do like your style!

Offline Dali

  • Child of Grace
  • **
  • Posts: 1,716
Re: a rare year, release-wise
« Reply #12 on: December 03, 2008, 05:57:33 AM »
Well, I didn't expect anything since they had basically bluffed me with new release rumours in 96 (pre-Pop) and in 1999. So, I got used to not believing there would be a new album before I see it in a store.