New album out in may 2007

nausearockpig · June 04, 2007, 04:26:57

yeah I'd be happy with a sprawling epic of a double album -be it vynil and or cd...

Bloodflower · June 04, 2007, 05:19:44

What the double album means -- if nothing else -- is that Robert, Simon, and Porl think that the sessions have yielded enough high quality songs to merit a double-album. So, while I'm sure there'll be filler, there's also bound to be a number of classics.

After all, what's the difference between creating a double album out of the bulk of the sessions, and making a single album and having a lot of b-sides?

Wild Mood Swings, anyone?

Janko · June 06, 2007, 11:19:02

WELL, I THINK THIS MIGHT BE THE TOUGHEST POINT IN THE BANDS CAREER...
AT LEAST SINCE 1993!

WHAT DO YOU THINK?

rodney · June 06, 2007, 14:18:14

I think that they're going to have to prove themselves to a lot of people again, that's for sure. However, I do think that it's a good sign that Geffen is willing to bankroll an eight month world tour based on these sessions.

Janko · June 08, 2007, 02:38:19

ROBERT MUST BE UNDER A TERRIBLE PRESSURE AT THE MOMENT!

THIS ALBUM MIGHT BE CRUCIAL FOR THE CURE.
ALSO, THE LABEL WILL MOST LIKELY INSIST ON A SUBSTANTIAL HIT SINGLE THIS TIME!
AND AS WE KNOW IT, THE BAND IS IN A STILL FAIRLY NEW LINEUP...

splitmilk34 · June 10, 2007, 13:59:07

Labels will (most likely) never demand a substantial hit single from bands like The Cure (and all the other bands who've been successfully soldiering on for more than 25 years) because sales of the new album as well as the peak in sales of the back catalog will go far enough that there is almost no risk to having these bands on their roster. In fact, as stupid as major label heads are, they'd have to be downright ignorant and simple to think that The Cure (or Depeche Mode, or Rolling Stones, or Paul McCartney, etc...) are going to have a monster hit. Most of what is super-popular today is disposable hip-hop, disposable pop, disposable emo and, for whatever reason, Maroon 5. It's just not happening for any artist that has been around that long - and if it did, everyone would be complaining, "Oh, they just copied Just Like Heaven AGAIN... boo whoo." No worries, with the lasting popularity/influence/recognition of The Cure they'll never have to worry about being dropped from a label. Their body of work insures them as a valuable asset to anyone lucky enough to have them on their roster.

Dillinger · June 10, 2007, 21:28:58

gefen dont get anything from their fiction work i dont think...

its true though, the big hitters are there to sell albums not singles

Bloodflower · June 11, 2007, 05:17:36

Didn't Depeche Mode just have a huge hit with Precious?

Janko · June 11, 2007, 06:31:23

Quote from: splitmilk34 on June 10, 2007, 13:59:07
Labels will (most likely) never demand a substantial hit single from bands like The Cure (and all the other bands who've been successfully soldiering on for more than 25 years) because sales of the new album as well as the peak in sales of the back catalog will go far enough that there is almost no risk to having these bands on their roster. In fact, as stupid as major label heads are, they'd have to be downright ignorant and simple to think that The Cure (or Depeche Mode, or Rolling Stones, or Paul McCartney, etc...) are going to have a monster hit. Most of what is super-popular today is disposable hip-hop, disposable pop, disposable emo and, for whatever reason, Maroon 5. It's just not happening for any artist that has been around that long - and if it did, everyone would be complaining, "Oh, they just copied Just Like Heaven AGAIN... boo whoo." No worries, with the lasting popularity/influence/recognition of The Cure they'll never have to worry about being dropped from a label. Their body of work insures them as a valuable asset to anyone lucky enough to have them on their roster.

WELL, THEY CAN MAKE JUST ANOTHER AVERAGE ALBUM BUT THEY WILL GET ZERO PROMOTION AND ZERO SUPPORT FROM THE LABEL...

I DONT EXPECT A MONSTER HITS, I JUST WANT MORE VISIBILITY FOR THEM!

AND ALSO, I WOULDNT LIKE THE CURE TO LIVE LIKE ROLLING STONES (ENDLESS TOURING DESPITE NOT HAVING A GREAT ALBUM FOR ALMOST 30 YEARS)!

splitmilk34 · June 11, 2007, 14:46:34

Quote from: Janko on June 11, 2007, 06:31:23

WELL, THEY CAN MAKE JUST ANOTHER AVERAGE ALBUM BUT THEY WILL GET ZERO PROMOTION AND ZERO SUPPORT FROM THE LABEL...

I DONT EXPECT A MONSTER HITS, I JUST WANT MORE VISIBILITY FOR THEM!

AND ALSO, I WOULDNT LIKE THE CURE TO LIVE LIKE ROLLING STONES (ENDLESS TOURING DESPITE NOT HAVING A GREAT ALBUM FOR ALMOST 30 YEARS)!

I don't want to see them go down that road either, but the fact of the matter is The Cure don't make the type of music that will be a huge hit and give them a lot of visibility. They never really have been that type of band, nor has Robert wanted to be that type of band. The reason why The Cure won't end up like a Rolling Stones is that there is more music in Robert's repertoire than there is in Mick's & Keith's. The Cure have always made albums that are wildly different from one another (and also mostly different than whatever the current landscape of popular music is) while the Stones have been recycling the same 3 blues progressions over and over again. Their music is dreadfully uninteresting and it's their "hits" that make them such a huge touring act... they don't even play a lot of their new songs. Whereas at Curiousa, The Cure played A TON of the new material and, I think, it translated very well live. My point is, I wouldn't go into defeatist mode just yet. Let's see what the new album has to offer rather than speculate how much Robert has lost it...

rodney · June 12, 2007, 18:23:35

Here in the US, Precious was hardly a "monster hit". Bigger than anything from Exciter maybe, but that's about it. Maybe light rotation on some of the more diverse "alternative" stations. I'd say that End of the World was bigger when it was released in 2004.

Bloodflower · June 13, 2007, 01:14:32

I'm out in California, and Precious was on the radio all the time in my city. The video was in fairly heavy rotation, too, on MTV and those other BS channels; or maybe Precious wasn't in heavy-rotation anywhere in the US, and I just had the fortune of always happening to turn on the radio/TV/etc. as it was about to come on....

Anyway, it was number four in the UK. Anything in the top five is a megahit, as far as I'm concerned.

[labyrinth] · June 13, 2007, 11:29:15

here in italy,too
Precious was a huge HIT ,
it was on MTV almost once a hour...

rodney · June 13, 2007, 16:21:27

Well, I am in the midwest (Cincinnati) which probably makes a difference, but I have XM Radio and heard it rarely on there.

Janko · June 14, 2007, 17:37:00

PRECIOUS WAS A HUGE HIT!
NO DOUBT ABOUT IT!

DM ARE STILL HUGE!