Springsteen's seven lost albums set to see daylight
Springsteen is known for hits like Born in the USA and I'm on Fire. PHOTO: FILE
Seven of Bruce Springsteen's albums will not be dancing in the dark for much longer. According to Guardian, this June, the veteran singer will release Tracks II: The Lost Albums, a massive box set of seven previously unreleased records spanning 1983 to 2018. The set, arriving on seven CDs (or nine vinyl discs), will include 83 songs, with a staggering 74 making their official debut.
Described by Sony Music as "rich chapters" of Springsteen's career, the albums were largely completed and shelved until the pandemic gave Springsteen the time to revisit and finish them. "I've played this music to myself and often close friends for years now," he said. "I'm glad you'll get a chance to finally hear them."
These aren't just b-sides or demos. Unlike 1998's Tracks, which gathered rarities, Tracks II includes full, cohesive albums that trace creative pivots and sonic experiments across decades.
Among the highlights are the LA Garage Sessions 83, raw working tapes leading up to Born in the USA, arguably Springsteen's greatest, though choosing one is no small feat considering the artist's stellar discography. Also featured are the Streets of Philadelphia Sessions, a 1990s experiment in drum loops, synths, and hip-hop textures.
Of the songs fans can anticipate to enjoy, there is Faithless, a moody soundtrack to a film that was never made; Somewhere North of Nashville, a pedal steel-soaked country detour from 1995; and Twilight Hours, a lush, orchestrated pop companion to Western Stars. Add Inyo to the mix, which is a collection of "border tales" with tracks like The Aztec Dance and Ciudad Juarez. Springsteen rounds it off with Perfect World, a compilation of collaborations with Joe Grushecky. The album is anchored by the fierce Rain in the River, which has already been released, and can be heard and loved on all streaming platforms.
In a video trailer, Springsteen pushed back against the idea of a "lost" '90s. "I really, really was working the whole time," he said.
Alongside the music, the box set includes a 100-page book with rare archival photos and liner notes for each album. A curated 20-song sampler will also be made available separately.
Now 75, Springsteen shows no signs of slowing down. As he prepares for a European tour in May, he promises to keep playing "until the wheels come off." And with Tracks II, fans are finally invited into the decades of hidden work he's long held close.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
26-05-2025
- Express Tribune
Books for bros, not women
One thing we can probably safely assume about Andrew Tate and his brigade of men's rights activists is that they probably do not have much time for casual reading, devoted as they are to bringing to the limelight that famously overlooked Y-chromosome demographic. However, Tate and his band of merry men may doubtless be delighted to learn that starting June 2026, there will be at least one UK publisher committed to fuelling the dreams of male writers only, making one giant in the barren world of men's rights. Or least men's publishing. Conduit Books, founded by British novelist and critic Jude Cook, aims to focus on publishing literary fiction and memoirs exclusively by men. "This new breed of young female authors ushered in a renaissance for literary fiction by women, giving rise to a situation where stories by new male authors are often overlooked, with a perception that the male voice is problematic," explained Cook to the Guardian. As a taster for the high calibre of work we can expect from the male sector of human population, as opposed to the presumably frothy airport-novel variety being that is the domain of women, the Conduit Books website promises that the upcoming published material will be "Ambitious. Humorous. Political. Cerebral." Cook himself illustrates his and his fellow men's anguish best when he notes, "Excitement and energy around new and adventurous fiction is around female authors – and this is only right as a timely corrective". Not all men Before we award Cook's timely corrective a standing ovation and join him in side-eyeing new and exciting adventurous fiction penned by female authors (unworthy of the attention span of that vanishingly rare commodity: male readers), it is necessary to caution that sadly, it is not time for all men to celebrate. Males born before the nineties can put both their pens and their party hats away, because in addition to dragging sexism back into fashion as a necessary corrective measure, Conduit Books (treading the well-beaten path already paved by stalwarts of the fashion and entertainment industries) also seeks to remain committedly ageist. It is not just any old male writer who will do; Conduit Books' ideal man will be under the age of 35. If you, dear male writer with one foot in the grave, have just blown out the candles on your 36th birthday cake, I'm afraid the prospects are grim. However, Cook stresses that he is by no means as exclusive as hopeful writers may be led to believe: Conduit Books is wide open for any writers who identify as queer, non-binary, neurodivergent, or persons of colour. Just not men who are too old, or women of any age. Or description. Down with women Old age pensioners aside, Cook maintains that granting men such special attention is a necessary measure in the wake of women writers flooding the market over the past 15 years. Whilst he concedes that this renaissance was born in the wake of a male-dominated literary scene in the '80s, '90s and early 2000s, he is determined to swing that pesky pendulum back the other way. Cook's unspoken question is this: what on earth would possess your average male reader to pick up a book written by a woman? There is no singular answer for this, but Cook's fears are not his alone. As any Harry Potter fan is aware, JK Rowling herself was cautioned against using her first name Joanne when Philosopher's Stone was released in 1997 because her publisher feared that an audience of young boys would be unwilling to read a book penned by a woman. For the same reason, Robert Galbraith, Rowling's pseudonym for the Cormoran Strike books, too, is also decidedly male. Cook may have had a UK-specific market in mind when he aired his sad, nostalgic thoughts on male representation on the days of yore, but it is certainly true that those prolific men enjoyed quite the reach. Twenty years ago, could any of us set foot at a Karachi thelay wala's stall without being bombarded by those special whisker-thin-paged pirated copies of John Grisham's courtroom dramas or Stephen King's magnum opus on murderous clowns? Judging by the average Pakistani millennial's voracious knowledge of the American legal system's brutal litigious leanings (thank you, Rainmaker and Runaway Jury) or the varying supernatural horrors wreaking havoc upon the hapless residents of Maine (King, this is your moment in the sun), it would be foolish to ignore the global tentacles of male Western authors. Men like King, Grisham, and even Dan Brown (can any of us forget the literature lover's mania for the Mona Lisa circa 2004?) once reigned supreme. And now, to Cook's chagrin, thanks to the likes of Jodi Picoult and Emily Henry, that top spot has been encroached upon by women. If we need any proof, we need only take a casual glance at this week's New York Times bestselling fiction list (print and E-book combined), which is positively contaminated by female names: Danielle L Jensen, Freida McFadden, Ocean Vuong, Emily Henry, and Kennedy Ryan. Picoult, that queen of modern literary fiction, is not on this week's list, but her 2024 bestselling novel titled By Any Other Name (Cook must have loved this) explored the theme of silenced female voices in history by focusing on the struggles of a modern playwright trying to get her work produced. In other words: with thriller-bestseller magnate Harlan Coben having turned his attention to Netflix instead of churning out more books, male bestsellers are in danger of extinction as women refuse to budge from the top. Has the world gone mad? Have we already reached that saturation point where, in an effort to dismantle centuries'-old patriarchy, we have gone so far the other way that, as Cook hints (but does not say), men's rights are being eviscerated? In a world that already contains Tate and his fanclub, it should hardly come as a surprise that the world of literature, too, should turn the spotlight on diminishing male representation. The sacred treasurers of men's rights around the world have always stood guard for their gender, a fact that is beautifully evident in Pakistani dramas glorifying a "working woman" trotting out a five-course meal for her in-laws after a busy day at work. Cook may have never heard of Pakistani dramas and their utmost regard for the male gender, but he is no wallflower when it comes to looking out for his fellow men. He laments that male-centric narratives such as fatherhood, masculinity and negotiating the 21st century as a man have all taken a backseat as the publishing world's focus remains fixed on women. Does our hero have a point? Can only a man lure another man into picking up a work of fiction? Is the work of a woman unworthy of being read by a man? Is dick lit the answer to chick lit? Judging by the depleting number of adult males who read fiction by choice, perhaps Cook, the Emmeline Pankhurst of male readers, may have unlocked the only doorway to dragging lit bros back into the light.
Express Tribune
19-05-2025
- Express Tribune
Trump calls for investigation on Springsteen, Beyoncé for alleged payments received from Kamala Harris campaign
In another late-night social media tirade, former President Donald Trump escalated his ongoing feud with Bruce Springsteen by demanding a 'major investigation' into payments made to the rock legend and other celebrities for their appearances during Kamala Harris's 2024 presidential campaign. The controversy reignited after Springsteen launched his 'Land of Hope & Dreams' tour last week, slamming the Trump administration as 'corrupt, incompetent and treasonous.' Trump shot back, calling Springsteen a 'dried out prune of a rocker' who should 'KEEP HIS MOUTH SHUT.' Springsteen responded from the stage, labeling Trump 'unfit' and accusing his administration of 'persecuting people for their right to free speech.' The verbal sparring quickly spilled over onto social media. Trump's latest post targets not just Springsteen, but also Beyoncé, Oprah Winfrey, and Bono, accusing them of accepting illegal campaign payments for their support during Harris's unsuccessful run. 'HOW MUCH DID KAMALA HARRIS PAY BRUCE SPRINGSTEEN FOR HIS POOR PERFORMANCE?' Trump wrote. 'WHY DID HE ACCEPT THAT MONEY IF HE IS SUCH A FAN? ISN'T THAT ILLEGAL? WHAT ABOUT BEYONCÉ, OPRAH, AND BONO? I am calling for a major investigation.' Springsteen performed at a Harris rally in Philadelphia last October, while Beyoncé spoke at one in Houston. Oprah hosted a $1 million town hall for the campaign, and Bono publicly criticized Trump's foreign policies, though his direct involvement with the campaign remains unclear. Democratic officials have already faced scrutiny over Harris's campaign spending, which topped $1 billion but failed to secure any battleground states. Senior advisers have insisted the campaign did not pay artists directly for endorsements. Adrienne Elrod, a senior Harris campaign spokesperson, told Deadline, 'We have never paid any artist or performer.' Campaign filings reveal payments to Springsteen's production company for 'travel and event production' costs, totaling around $75,000, while Beyoncé's production company received $165,000 after her Houston rally appearance. Oprah's team was also reimbursed for production expenses, but the star herself has said she did not take a personal fee. Despite the clarifications, Trump insists the expenditures violate campaign finance laws by disguising endorsements as entertainment payments. 'Candidates aren't allowed to pay for ENDORSEMENTS under the guise of entertainment,' Trump claimed. 'It's corrupt and unlawful.' As the battle of words rages on, the political and entertainment worlds watch closely to see if Trump's call for an investigation gains any traction — or if it's simply the latest episode in his ongoing war with his critics.
Express Tribune
18-05-2025
- Express Tribune
Kid Rock criticizes Bruce Springsteen over anti-Trump comments during UK concert
Bruce Springsteen's recent remarks criticizing U.S. President Donald Trump during a concert in Manchester, England, have drawn backlash from musician and outspoken Trump supporter Kid Rock. During the opening night of his Land of Hope and Dreams tour earlier this week, Springsteen referred to the Trump administration as 'corrupt, incompetent and treasonous.' He called on the crowd to rise against authoritarianism, emphasizing the role of art and music in defending democratic values. 'In my home, the America I love... is currently in the hands of a corrupt, incompetent, and treasonous administration,' Springsteen said. 'Let freedom ring!' In response to Springsteen's statements, Kid Rock, 54, voiced his disapproval during an appearance on Fox & Friends on Friday. He accused Springsteen of trying to gain favor with Hollywood elites and dismissed his criticism as an example of 'Trump Derangement Syndrome.' 'To be in Europe talking junk about our president… what a punk move,' said Rock. 'This guy's got, what, 500 million, a billion dollars… and is out there playing like he's a working-class hero.' Springsteen added further remarks later in his set, stating, 'The last check on power after the checks and balances of government have failed are the people, you and me.' The commentary didn't go unnoticed by Trump, 78, who reacted on his platform, TruthSocial. He dismissed Springsteen as 'Highly Overrated,' calling him a 'pushy, obnoxious JERK' and criticizing his political affiliations with former President Joe Biden.
