frostbitepanda

You wouldn't be a Beatels fan would you?

OMG NIGHTSWIMMING. I WAS THERE AND IT WAS AMAZING. Can someone rip the audio of this?

That's so cool of them.

I like how on MySpace the bulletin announcing it was all 'Rare recording of obscure song <i>Carefuly Where You Stand</i> now up on coldplay.com!' and I'm sitting there like 'Psssh... I've had that song for years.' I'm so obsessed.

I thought that they were going to try to stick to the mid-size venues like civic centers and the like (Like the Rush of Blood tour), no?

Faultline. Hands down.

Well put. You better be glad that they even do shit like that. 98% of bands couldn't give two shits.

HAHAHAHAH. Who THINKS of this shit? SERIOUSLY.

Aw. I love them so hard.

That's so unfair. They're both so good.

Errrrnnnnghhh...

Er-- Sorry there Ian. Really excited

*EXPLODES*

I've watched all those bloopers. Ohhhh man... I need a life. But that WAV thing that you poster Tracie was hilarious. :D

I bet Christmas Day they'll post the album title and release date of maybe a snippet of a new song... or maybe all three. Who knows? Be patient, my friends.

You must be an awesome person, because you like X Files, Coldplay, Radiohead, and Ron Paul. :)

*freaks out*

Even if this was true, I highly doubt that smoking pot would tear his life apart or ruin his marriage. And his marriage isn't ruined, by the way. Celeb magazines regularly report the immeint demise of Celeb marriages. It sells units, unsubstantiated or not. Simple as that. And the new song titles just suggests a new period in the band's creative process. I'm pretty sure you're going off the deep end here.

Those venues are way too big. Not even U2 plays venues like that all the time. The could've played at the Georgia Dome when they were here, but instead played at a large, but smaller, more contained venue. I can't imagine seeing a concert at the Georgia Dome... it's, simply put, too vast. In fact, I think the arenas are too big. In 2005, with their popularity in the stratosphere, they were forced to play in arenas to accommodate the fans and, as such, they tried really hard to 'fit' into an arena setting (Big lights, the songs from X&Y, Chris flailing more than usual on stage... so on and so forth) because Coldplay don't belong in an arena. Their sound is more fitting for mid-sized and theatre venues (Like Red Rocks and The Tabernacle) and club shows. It's like imagining Sigur Rós in Madison Square Garden. It just doesn't work (And I don't mean to imply that their arena tour was a failure, but it certainly wasn't successful as their Rush of Blood tour where they were playing venues that seated 1,800 + as opposed to 20,000+).

Awww. How sweet of them. :wacky:

Awww... that was beautiful. :(

That was very good. Chris seems to be on an entirely different plane of reality than usual when he preforms.

PAHHAHAHAHAA.

No. It's not ridiculous, because like I said before, Parachutes was about the same length. There is nothing wrong with a short album and it's stupid to think that there has to be a certain time limit to an album. What is ridiculous is to presume that a certain number of songs has to be recorded in a certain amount of time. Did you ever stop to think that they recorded dozens of songs within these month but only deemed a handful worthy? Shouldn't that be a good thing? I mean... Sgt. Pepper's (39 mins), Revolver (32 mins), Pet Sounds (40 mins), Amnesiac (43 mins). What the hell man? What are you basing your opinions off? How can you get so outraged over something so insignificant? And, as I said, acording to my iTunes, Parachutes is 41.7 mins. I mean, come on man... think of X&Y. They've never been in the studio longer than for X&Y and it was an hour of rehashed bombast. The time spent touring is irrelevant. Sigur Rós spent a longer time touring and promoting, but you don't see anyone bitching about that do you? (I mean... technically, with Hiema, it's like they're still promoting Takk) The tour period of a band's career is when the fans are just looking forward to seeing their favorite band in the media and anticipating seeing them at least once, if not more. It's essential. That's actually the time where it's most about the fans. That's why bands do it. Exactly. I agree. And from what I hear, they're going in a new direction, but what does that have to do with a 42 minuet long record? I wasn't comparing, I was using an example. You can't dismiss the fact that Radiohead did take four years (Give or take) to record a 42 minuet record and you're bitching that Coldplay's been in the studio for a little under nine months and giving us an album that's the same length. The comparisons are unavoidable and can't simply dismiss it because it negates your petty argument. And, I think you're forgetting that they are adding two songs to the original track list anyway... putting the album at probably 50 mins. So you're ridiculous argument is unfounded anyway.

According to my iTunes it's 41.7 minuets long. Weird.