DS Forums

 
 

Adele 21 Re-release.


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 13-05-2012, 14:29
Steve35
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,338

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/music/ne...ew-tracks.html

Ffs, why? Just to get more money for the record company and her?
Steve35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 13-05-2012, 14:34
barlowconnor
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Leeds
Posts: 15,940
I hated re-releases i think there a waste of time.
barlowconnor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 14:57
MissDexter
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,554
Rereleases are hardly a new thing but I suppose it's something else to bash Adele for
MissDexter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 15:20
Steve35
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,338
Rereleases are hardly a new thing but I suppose it's something else to bash Adele for
I'm not bashing her, just re-releases in general. At least with some re-releases you get another cd and live tracks.
Steve35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 15:48
RaptureRider
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,796
I was waiting for this to happen.

It's sad that her labels main reason behind this re-release is to beat Queen. "21" has amazingly well for an album that's only been out just over a year and they should just leave it at that. It will easily beat Oasis and will probably surpass Abba in time and that's without a re-release. I guess all the records Adele has broken so far just isn't enough for her label.

They should just keep whatever tracks they want to include on this re-issue and either put them on her next album or release an EP.
RaptureRider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 15:58
MissDexter
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,554
I'm not bashing her, just re-releases in general. At least with some re-releases you get another cd and live tracks.
Sorry, didn't mean you inparticular -was referring to the serial Adele-bashers that frequent these forums.
MissDexter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 16:01
ICON111
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: DS
Posts: 3,101
Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo not 21 being best selling album of 2011 and 2012 but now with this re-release it will 2013 and 2014!!!! Lord have mercy
ICON111 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 16:13
mkirilenkofan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 719
It is being reported in the dAily star and they say they are discussing it. No where in that article gives light to it being greenlit.

The song she has done for the en of the year which will be for 'Skyfall'.
mkirilenkofan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 16:54
MrIncredible
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 4,638
Id be very surprised if this happened. And considering the source is the Daily Star I would take it with a very large pinch of salt.
MrIncredible is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 17:54
gpk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Penryn, Falmouth, Cornwall.
Posts: 10,034
i hope this does not happen, it will ruin her and it doesn't make any sense. the album has performed exceptionally well without massive physical promotion on her part. so to end this albums life span with a cheap cashing seems to go against the way they have played the promotion process so far.
gpk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 19:51
pikeur
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,817
Im actually for a re release providing it offers value for money as in at least 3-4 brand new songs and some live performances.

I havnt bought the album yet as i said i would wait and see if a re release will happen, so i will hold off buying the album until this is confirmed or denied.

A proper re release with value for money could indeed see 21 become the biggest selling album in the UK ever.
pikeur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 20:40
Jon Ross
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Somewhere extremely creepy
Posts: 3,088
Seriously, anyone is surprised by this? Adele's album is a cash cow for her label and they will exploit this as much as possible.

Perhaps her label don't have much confidence in the prospects of her next album, which will presumably be imaginatively titled 24?
Jon Ross is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 20:42
Jon Ross
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Somewhere extremely creepy
Posts: 3,088
Sorry, didn't mean you inparticular -was referring to the serial Adele-bashers that frequent these forums.
Adele is the new Phil Collins to a lot of people, of course they will bash her. She's done it a lot quicker than Collins too - it took him years to achieve this level of tedious ubiquity.
Jon Ross is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 20:45
Simon Rodgers
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,771
I thought the album was called 21 because of her age. Should it be rereleased with extra tracks wouldn't the name have to change?
Simon Rodgers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 20:47
Simon Rodgers
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,771
I hated re-releases i think there a waste of time.
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/music/ne...ew-tracks.html

Ffs, why? Just to get more money for the record company and her?
Isn't it a triffle bit unfair on all the millions who bought the original album to make it successful in the first place?
Simon Rodgers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 20:49
Simon Rodgers
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,771
Im actually for a re release providing it offers value for money as in at least 3-4 brand new songs and some live performances.

I havnt bought the album yet as i said i would wait and see if a re release will happen, so i will hold off buying the album until this is confirmed or denied.

A proper re release with value for money could indeed see 21 become the biggest selling album in the UK ever.
I was tempted to buy the album myself but I think I'll wait. 19 was also repackaged as well.
Simon Rodgers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 20:51
Simon Rodgers
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,771
i hope this does not happen, it will ruin her and it doesn't make any sense. the album has performed exceptionally well without massive physical promotion on her part. so to end this albums life span with a cheap cashing seems to go against the way they have played the promotion process so far.
Any furture albums she releases probably won't too well because everyone will be waiting for re-release versions.
Simon Rodgers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 20:52
Simon Rodgers
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,771
I hated re-releases i think there a waste of time.
It's not just music albums. DVDs and sometimes books do the same.
Simon Rodgers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 20:58
little-monster
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 30,200
People moaning about re-releases again
It's simple, don't like the idea of them then simply do not buy them
little-monster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 21:00
danielleh
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,253
I'm not a fan of re-releases. It's a bit of an insult to fans who've already paid for the first issue of the album. I don't mind deluxe versions when they are released at the same time, but re-releases are just annoying.

If there was some form of system where you could return your original copy of the album in exchange for the re-release (and pay the difference), that would be good - but no such system exists, or ever will.
danielleh is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 21:00
little-monster
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 30,200
I'm not a fan of re-releases. It's a bit of an insult to fans who've already paid for the first issue of the album. I don't mind deluxe versions when they are released at the same time, but re-releases are just annoying.

If there was some form of system where you could return your original copy of the album in exchange for the re-release (and pay the difference), that would be good - but no such system exists, or ever will.
That's a good idea actually
little-monster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 21:03
my name is joe
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: In England
Posts: 4,349
I'm not a fan of re-releases. It's a bit of an insult to fans who've already paid for the first issue of the album. I don't mind deluxe versions when they are released at the same time, but re-releases are just annoying.

If there was some form of system where you could return your original copy of the album in exchange for the re-release (and pay the difference), that would be good - but no such system exists, or ever will.
re-releases & de-luxe editions are both nonsense
my name is joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 21:14
konebyvax
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Ignoringtrollsville
Posts: 7,875
Sort of agree but to be fair this deluxe edition of '21' is good value for those who don't own a copy, lol.

http://hmv.com/hmvweb/displayProduct...;-1&sku=262343
konebyvax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 21:53
Louise-ann
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,076
Urgh really.

I didn't want the album first time round, and I still don't want it
Louise-ann is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 21:58
my name is joe
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: In England
Posts: 4,349
Urgh really.

I didn't want the album first time round, and I still don't want it
you're ok...according to a source it won't be compulsory to buy it
my name is joe is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 14:32.