1. Originally posted by wj:When reading Adam’s comments, I think he is referring to rearranging some of the songs they already have as in: new songs that they have been working on lately. In the process of making an album they always rearrange their songs constantly to see what ‘style’ suits the song best before they mould them into their final version. In this way, a track that started out as an acoustic track can become a full blown rock song in the final version and the other way around. So I guess no worries needed here for U2 revisiting their back catalogue and giving it an ‘acoustic treatment’.
    That's exactly how I read the comment from day one.
    I was surprised some people took it as meaning re-arranging old existing U2 songs
  2. Originally posted by marik:[..]
    That's exactly how I read the comment from day one.
    I was surprised some people took it as meaning re-arranging old existing U2 songs
    I agree with you too, but I understand where the confusion comes from.

    (...) rearranging some of the songs that we have and setting them in a more acoustic environment.
    (...) lets look at these songs and imagine them in a different context.
    (...) He’s putting a lot of work into changing the keys, and moving them onto piano and that sort of thing.
    (...) that will show a different light on U2.


    These sentences are ambiguous and could be interpreted either as new material that they had already written and they're trying to approach them acoustically, OR older songs that they want to revisit acoustically. I very much prefer the first possibility, but I'll be happy with the second as long as it doesn't affect a potential new album.
  3. Originally posted by LikeASong:[..]
    I agree with you too, but I understand where the confusion comes from.

    (...) rearranging some of the songs that we have and setting them in a more acoustic environment.
    (...) lets look at these songs and imagine them in a different context.
    (...) He’s putting a lot of work into changing the keys, and moving them onto piano and that sort of thing.
    (...) that will show a different light on U2.


    These sentences are ambiguous and could be interpreted either as new material that they had already written and they're trying to approach them acoustically, OR older songs that they want to revisit acoustically. I very much prefer the first possibility, but I'll be happy with the second as long as it doesn't affect a potential new album.
    They've reinterpreted a lot of songs over the years stripped them down for live gigs and recorded them for various releases, now whether they intend to record old songs again for a specific project is another question could be for a film bio or documentary soundtrack or a best of who knows but I think he was referring to songs they've recently recorded and are taking a more stripped back approach.
  4. I'm hoping they will celebrate the 25th anniversary of Pop with some kind of remaster. And dreaming of new mixes of ALL songs like REM did with Monster and Edge did with some of the singles (although the album is perfect as it is).
  5. Originally posted by RememberEveryMoment:I'm hoping they will celebrate the 25th anniversary of Pop with some kind of remaster. And dreaming of new mixes of ALL songs like REM did with Monster and Edge did with some of the singles (although the album is perfect as it is).
    As long as they don't celebrate the 25th anniversary of Pop with acoustic rearrangements of its songs...
  6. or two discs of remixes...don't give them any ideas
  7. I can't often confirm anything with this amount of confidence...but i'm 150% confident this is nothing to do with Pop's 25th anniversary.
  8. Originally posted by u2wanderer1:[..]
    I can't often confirm anything with this amount of confidence...but i'm 150% confident this is nothing to do with Pop's 25th anniversary.
    I'm 150% confident they will keep ignoring and bullying Pop for a long time, yeah.