Fix42YellowClocks

Musically=fairly strong. Lyrically=one of their weakest efforts ever. So. Yeah. but that's just my opinion.

"Is there any chance you may tell us what DLIBYH stands for? Everyone is saying it's "Don't Let it Break Your Heart" but it's a really baffling acronym, I must say. Cheers!" I just asked the Oracle. Hopefully she answers!

It's not trolling. Just your own personal interest/experience.

Don't Let it Bring You Hell

1. The guitar is country-ish. And I'm surprised because Jonny's guitar playing beats all the country guitar garbage in history put together. It really makes their music look bad in comparison to Coldplay so I don't see why they'd do that. 2. It doesn't surprise me. No one in my family over the age of 30 likes them besides my brother. :S 3. It's different when you listen to a radio station that plays 10,000 songs that sound exactly the same and then you here one so much more out there, one that isn't so sad the person singing sounds suicidally depressed, and one that actually takes TALENT to make isn't it?

Let opinions fall where they may. No two people feel the same.

Someone put up another tracklist... :|

Food part sounds good. Not the music though. Country covers ruin everything. Perfect example? Nine Inch Nails' "Hurt". Jonny Cash ruined it, for me anyway. Good guy, very bad cover.

It's really nice. But I don't see Alien Radio being on the album. Much more likely is UFO (Yayy!!!!! :) ) since it was registered at both the ASCCAP and BMI. The rest of the tracklist I could def. see being potentially correct in the future when they tell us the real one.

Didn't see that part. :P Good call though. No way.

Bad misspell. And no credible. But I actually wouldn't be surprised at all if the tracklist were very close to this. The only things are 1) There's no "Up in Flames" and 2) I see know reason why it would be MX on the tracklist and no Mylo Xyloto.

Weird. It's almost as if they're taken out all the articles (a, an, the) from the songs. EXCEPT for Us Against the World. Which is very strange, I must say. Maybe they just simply shortened the two titles. Weird all the same. All I can say. But good find! [: If it's on ASCAP AND BMI it definitely holds a lot of weight my friend.

I'm quite excited to hear Paradise but I'm definitely more excited of the possibility that we'll get the tracklisting!!! We deserve it. If we don't get it when the song comes out I'll be very sad. We got the tracklist for Viva a little over two months before it came out and we've already passed that threshold for Mylo Xyloto so. P.S. I like the title. Not only because of the mystery and meaning to come but it's length. Typing out A Rush of Blood to the Head and Viva la Vida or Death and All His Friends isn't the most fun thing. And X&Y is way short. It's more like Parachutes. It's a short-medium title. Random, sorry.

I'm starting to think that, since they are on the site; they are either going to be put on the album or released in some form. Otherwise, if they weren't going to finish or release them, why register them? They said they're finishing 13 songs. This list makes 11 plus Up in Flames, so that's 12. Add Major Minus and Moving to Mars and that's all 14. But when they said they'll finish 13, I don't think they were including ETIAW, Major Minus, or Moving to Mars. So that's 16 songs in actuality, two of which we don't know/haven't been registered. That's just my theory. I don't believe it was either, which was very peculiar I might add. True. But if it IS registered it's likely it will be part of the album or a b-side. Or else why register it? No one's going to steal unfinished songs so there's no need to register them. This isn't Green Day's Cigarettes and Valentines. As I said, I imagine 3 (including Up in Flames) haven't been registered yet.

I said alcohol my friend, not drugs. While I've done neither, they are two completely different things. And they've all had alcohol before so. i don't see why it couldn't be about that? Especially when Chris also wrote a song called sex and violence. Something you also WOULDN'T expect from Coldplay. Hmm. which seems worse? I'm going to say the latter song. And he's not telling people to use it, he's just speaking from experience. I don't honestly know what he means nor do I pretend to. but i've just never heard of someone saying i took perspective from someone. you could say you learned it, found it, but not took it. What else (besides alcohol) can you TAKE from a person that they OFFER you to set you 'FREE' after STEALING a car and going DOWNTOWN? Not upper mid-class, sophisticated, UPTOWN. We're talking crime-ridden, dark alley DOWNTOWN my friend. DOWNNNNN TOWNNNNNN. Think about it. It has sketchy/dark written allllll over it.

"all the highs, all the lows, as the room is spinning... we'll run wild, we'll start glowing in the dark." Actually, I always thought it was an alcohol/drug reference too. A subtle one. But one no less. Spinning rooms? What other explanation is there for that? Makes me think of drunkenness. And took what they offered me, to set me free? Alcohol helps you let go of your inhibitions. It does set you free essentially. And it's not like people under the influence haven't done outlandish/crazy things. We'll run wild? It's all an innocent riot? It all seems to fit well together man. :nod:

Oh. Maybe I'm just weird then. idk. :P Thank you. (: And I won't. I'm not going to listen to the Sky Sports ads at all. I am glad to hear it's really amazing though. Even better than the live version I'm assuming. Which is awesome!

This all true. Good points. But the thing for me that's different compared with those other situations is. It's the FIRST time we're hearing the song as the studio version. Partial or not. We shouldn't be hearing what could potentially be the best/one of the best songs from the new album on some tv commercial first. Because first impressions are important. And like I said before. if the first time us fans hear it on some advertisement. What are we more likely to think? "This song is so deep/interesting/awesome I wonder what it's about, how it fits into the MX concept, etc. (as the way it should be) or "This song is so catchy and commercial, I always remember that Sky Sports ad when I hear it. Maybe I should watch that sometime. What were they saying on it again? . The first time I listened to parts (not the whole songs) of Shiver and Trouble I was playing Castlevania: SotN for remembering the first impression example. And the point I'm trying to make is. There's a pseudo-commercial undertone when the first time you hear a new song and in fact the only place you can hear it for a month or more is some advertisement. I know it's just pieces. But I'm just saying. That's the way I look at it is all. I know everyone doesn't agree.

That's not QUITE bad then. I wasn't aware. Thank you for the info though. (: But I still wouldn't expect it from them. It's just the association and commercial-ality of it I guess. Whenever I heard it after the Sky Sports thing I wouldn't think "what's this song really about?" I'd think "this reminds me of that advertisement for the news network" and it just plain shouldn't be that way. You know what I mean? It's your FIRST impression of the 'real' version, it makes a big difference. And it's not like they need more money or more people to hear their music. They're one of the biggest bands in the world as it is. They're not some talent indie band looking for a nice break. That's what Sky Sports should be using. I just don't see the point. Damn. I'm tempted to listen. :| But I won't. And that's good thinking, I should've realized that. When did he start marketing for the band? Recently? I think he needs to goooo... :P

It makes me sad. I remember the days when the old Coldplay wouldn't let corporations use their music for commercials. They turned down million dollar contracts from big stores to use Don't Panic, Trouble and Yellow. And now. Well. I know it's not the whole song. Like it's no lyrics. But it makes me wonder. What ever happened to 'not selling the meaning of the song'? I don't like this. Not one bit. And I'm going to wait until the album comes out before i hear Charlie Brown. Plus, it's just not the same without the lyrics.

Thank you. :] And that's what I'm saying. It's not a major-deal. I was just wondering is all.

Not really. I mean, why should what anyone makes be private? Everyone here in the US has to disclose it to the government anyway. I'm sure they do the same thing in England so what's the difference? Privatization just messes up things anyway. Ah how I long for a socialist state. ~ And it might just be the performance shares. i'm not sure, but that's why I asked. I don't see how what I did was so wrong. It's not like I made another tracklist thread or something talking about the JS lawsuit. I'm just curious is all. I know Coldplay's not about money. But they SAID sometime back they share it equally. And I for one find that both humble and brillant. If that's not the case anymore, it has negative implications for my ideological point of view regarding them outside their music. So it matters.

+100 This is the epitome of unfairness.

For some reason this bothers me to no end. http://www.wikicoldplay.com/File:MyloxylotoPRS1.png I know Chris does most of the songwriting. But I mean. He's also not the best lyricist ever. Some of the songs strike a chord in me with the words (The Scientist, Clocks, Viva la Vida to name a few) but it's always been the SOUND- the incomparable melodies, structures, arrangements, and musical talent that draws me to their music. Whatever happened to sharing the money equally??? The band wouldn't be the same without Jonny, Guy or Will and I've taken an enormous hit from the idea that Chris is getting twice as much money as the rest of them. He's been my idol for a long time. But now, I just don't know what to think... This whole thing has rocked the foundation of what I've believed regarding the band for a long time. And yes, finally a thread not guessing at what songs will make the album or what Mylo Xyloto means or anything like that. :P

I respectfully disagree sir. Who knows how long it will be? We won't until we hear it. And 13 songs in 42 minutes? haha yeah right. Not unless there's like 3 or 4 that are only a minute in length. Which would suck btw. And they CAN. Rules were meant to be broken. Who even knows if they still have that list up in the studio.