Poll

well?

yes
29 (55.8%)
no
11 (21.2%)
yes, but I'd still be a bit upset about it
12 (23.1%)

Total Members Voted: 45

Voting closed: October 29, 2014, 09:45:26 AM

Author Topic: Would you accept a new U2 album less than 40 minutes long?  (Read 6203 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline imaginary friend

  • Airborne Ranger
  • ***
  • Posts: 9,839
  • the vaccine for your wack scene
Would you accept a new U2 album less than 40 minutes long?
« on: July 01, 2014, 09:45:26 AM »
I've been listening to some older albums by other bands lately, and I'm struck by how short some of them are. Steely Dan's Aja: 37 minutes. Rush's Hemispheres: 38 minutes, as is Yes' Close to the Edge. Hell, none of the first 4 Van Halen albums even makes it to the 35-minute mark.

U2, on the other hand...I don't think they've ever come in at less than 40 minutes right from the beginning. Perhaps more to the point, I think the last studio album they've made that comes in under 50 minutes running time, was The Unforgettable Fire.

What say you?



Offline an tha

  • Airborne Ranger
  • ***
  • Posts: 9,430
  • You can swallow, or you can spit.
Re: Would you accept a new U2 album less than 40 minutes long?
« Reply #1 on: July 01, 2014, 09:57:06 AM »
Length isn't important, it's what you do with it!....

Offline Johnny Feathers

  • Elevated
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,027
Re: Would you accept a new U2 album less than 40 minutes long?
« Reply #2 on: July 01, 2014, 10:13:03 AM »
It would inevitably be seen as something "less" than previous efforts by some folks, but I would happily take a short but great album.  I'm more and more of the mind that albums rarely need to be longer than 45 minutes, and can often be shorter.  Just because an artist can fill up more time doesn't make an album better--and can often make it worse.

Offline The Exile

  • Up With the Sun
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,245
  • It's all ball bearings nowadays.
Re: Would you accept a new U2 album less than 40 minutes long?
« Reply #3 on: July 01, 2014, 11:06:56 AM »
Since I am of the opinion that no song needs to be longer than 90 seconds, yes.

Offline THRILLHO

  • Holy Joe
  • ***
  • Posts: 17,361
  • The sun won't melt our wings tonight
Re: Would you accept a new U2 album less than 40 minutes long?
« Reply #4 on: July 01, 2014, 11:26:58 AM »
uh yes? why wouldnt i? short =/= bad

Offline Thunder Peel

  • Up With the Sun
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,549
Re: Would you accept a new U2 album less than 40 minutes long?
« Reply #5 on: July 01, 2014, 11:49:09 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Length isn't important, it's what you do with it!....

Indeed. As long as it's great I'm not picky about length. I'd rather have 30 minutes of solid music than 60 minutes of filler.

Offline THRILLHO

  • Holy Joe
  • ***
  • Posts: 17,361
  • The sun won't melt our wings tonight
Re: Would you accept a new U2 album less than 40 minutes long?
« Reply #6 on: July 01, 2014, 11:52:42 AM »
we could all argue which songs we'd of like removed from our least favorite albums by U2. making them shorter, and better.

Tarahumara

  • Guest
Re: Would you accept a new U2 album less than 40 minutes long?
« Reply #7 on: July 01, 2014, 12:15:54 PM »
I would NOT accept that! Completely unacceptable after a 5-year wait!!

Offline ZooClothes

  • Precious Stone
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,616
  • This is where you can reach me now.
Re: Would you accept a new U2 album less than 40 minutes long?
« Reply #8 on: July 01, 2014, 01:22:06 PM »
One or both? ;)

Offline Pride

  • Numb
  • **
  • Posts: 900
  • North Dakota is best Dakota
Re: Would you accept a new U2 album less than 40 minutes long?
« Reply #9 on: July 01, 2014, 01:25:58 PM »
Well, based on the facts that October is their shortest album at 41:05, and it is also my second favorite album means I would accept it, but I've always felt that it should longer, so I'd go with choice #3.

Offline Messenger

  • Running to Stand Still
  • **
  • Posts: 1,086
  • The universe is beautiful but cold.
Re: Would you accept a new U2 album less than 40 minutes long?
« Reply #10 on: July 01, 2014, 06:14:25 PM »
Album length is a pretty silly way to judge an album, let alone a thing get upset about.

Is anyone really upset that Sgt Pepper is less than 40 minutes long?

(You could argue that Strawberry Fields Forever and Penny Lane should be on the album but I'd say it's pretty ok the way it is)

If OL and Invisible are on the new album and they push it to 55 minutes, would it be that much better?


OL and Invisible are nowhere near on the level of SFF and PL obviously.

Offline Runtmg

  • Refugee
  • *
  • Posts: 277
Re: Would you accept a new U2 album less than 40 minutes long?
« Reply #11 on: July 01, 2014, 10:06:41 PM »
I want an experience.  I listen occasionally to Weezer's Green album and it's fairly short and I love it. 


Offline THRILLHO

  • Holy Joe
  • ***
  • Posts: 17,361
  • The sun won't melt our wings tonight
Re: Would you accept a new U2 album less than 40 minutes long?
« Reply #12 on: July 01, 2014, 10:09:14 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I want an experience.  I listen occasionally to Weezer's Green album and it's fairly short and I love it.

HAHAH i was gonna reference this! 28 minutes of quick power pop summer time goodness. and Crab.

Offline imaginary friend

  • Airborne Ranger
  • ***
  • Posts: 9,839
  • the vaccine for your wack scene
Re: Would you accept a new U2 album less than 40 minutes long?
« Reply #13 on: July 01, 2014, 10:34:29 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Album length is a pretty silly way to judge an album, let alone a thing get upset about.


Maybe...but it is something U2 have made a point of at least once - Under A Blood Red Sky was sold as a "mini LP", even though it was about 5 minutes longer than VH's 1982 release, Diver Down, which wasn't sold as a "mini LP."

Offline Droo

  • Traffic Cop (Rue du Marais)
  • ***
  • Posts: 10,172
  • don't expect, suggest
Re: Would you accept a new U2 album less than 40 minutes long?
« Reply #14 on: July 01, 2014, 10:38:08 PM »
It all depends on the quality of the music. Zooropa has only ten tracks (although several of the songs are loooong) and it's my favourite of theirs.

So long as it moves me and is worth this long, arduous wait we're being put through, then I'm good.