U2's Next Album: What It Should & Shouldn't Be

For those of you disillusioned with the lack of "big" groups among our age group, despair no longer for the much delayed 13th U2 album will be released next year. In fact, it is nearly finished with bassist Adam Clayton saying that they hope to have it all wrapped up for Christmas. Of course, we cannot say when next year it will be released but it will hopefully be sooner rather than later considering their last effort has nearly reached the age of 5. No Line On The Horizon was of course a success but for U2 comparisons, it fell short of expectations. Bono felt the single "Get On Your Boots" busted the deal and I would agree wholeheartedly, for the album, albeit overtly produced with a blank or two, was actually pretty good. So with the release of their next album, it is once again make-or-break. If they want to remain a relevant force for multiple generations on the radio, then they'll have to up their game and get a hit; if they want to slide into the eerily close territory of nostalgia-forever like the Rolling Stones, then they should release whatever's easy and get out on the road. Hopefully, they choose the former. With that thought in mind, here's somehings we feel the album should and shouldn't be:

Should Be-

1. Consistent: No Line On The Horizon was better than How To Dismantle... for consistency, it just lacked a hit single. But a band like U2 could really do with another album that's decent the whole way through; something they're not great at.
2. With Some Hits- U2 are that rare combination of an albums' and singles' band. They've garnered critical acclaim whilst selling a bucketload too. Of course, if you want to get the public's attention, then another "Beautiful Day" or "Sometimes You Can't Make It On Your Own" is required.
3. Shorter- U2 have some great songs but even their best hits go on about 30 seconds too long. The Beatles' singles never went on over 4 minutes (bar a couple of exceptions) and nor should any of the other, lesser band's. Unless it's a killer ballad, keep it short and sweet.

Shouldn't Be-

1. Produced By Brian Eno: He overdoes it with U2. He produced their last album and by god, it dragged on for ages. There was also a rumour that they were considering working with will.i.am, but if that's the case, please go with Brian Eno. Hell, go with Miley Cyrus!
2. Too U2ish: Keep the ridiculous guitar riffs that plague every single U2 song (remembered Bill Bailey's tutorial) to a minimum this time, Edge. U2 have a tendency to release a song or album which many love at first and then grow tired of soon as it transpires that it's all just the same old U2. Include a piano, maybe.

1. Collaborative: Outside the producer's mixing booth, I don't want to hear Rihanna or Chris Martin or Jay Z or god help us, Drake coming in for a verse. Way too many artists rely on this cheap method of selling an extra few singles and if you want to prove you and you alone are what makes it, then put down the contact book and get back to basics.
2. A Political Platform: Well, maybe to an extent- you can't stop Bono being who he is and you can't deny that "Sunday Bloody Sunday" is one of their finest but if they're trying to be the "big" band they once were, again, then try to inject a bit of fun back into the mix.

And that is all... Excited? No? Please let us know what you think- are U2 relevant enough for mainstream radio anymore or is it perhaps time to conclude that their ridiculously long and prosperous era is over?