In Defence of HTDAAB, and in Offence of ATYCLB...

[Niceman]

ATYCLB has soul (the goal is soul). It has warmth, feeling and emotion - however clumsily represented. Even the weakest songs have a bit of character. When I think of the B-Sides and unreleased tracks it gets even better. I think it is probably my 4th or 5th favourite album.

HTDAAB has songs, and a certain cold detachment bar SYCMIOYO. It doesn't hang together well and I can't connect with the band - especially Bono. I love Vertigo and COBL and many of the other songs are "good" but they just don't "reach me" in any way. Sure, Miracle Drug is okay, AMAAW is okay - but I feel nothing about them.
Only Rattle & Hum rates below HTDAAB for me.

Talking about Soul isn't always the same thing as having it! lol!
New York? Peace on Earth? Grace? Walk On? When I Look at the World? I dunno.... I don't think any of them are as good as any of the songs U2 released on ANY album in the 1990s...... Red Light is the only one in the 80s that keeps me from making an even bigger statement.....

 

[Montrose]

That's an interesting point.

A long time ago, I was listening to an interview with KRS-One of Boogie-Down Productions fame, where he was giving advice to modern rappers on how to create a memorable rap song.

He said, "mood".

You can have lyrics, you ran rhyme, you can flow, you can have thick beats, all of those things.. but if your song has no mood to it, it won't be memorable, won't be good.

(and he would know - listen to 'Love's Gonna Getcha' and you'll see what he means.)

U2's a band that lives off mood - or emotion, I'd say. Most of their songs have a mood to them, a certain feeling, and most are infused with an strong emotional content.

But what usually makes an entire album an overall hit or miss is the ability to inflect that mood, that overriding emotional appeal, across all the songs, all the lyrics, the photography, the tour, the media.

It's no easy trick when each song by necessity has to be different. How do you take an album that had odes to life and perseverence, laments over lost life, struggles with mid-life crisis and doubt, pleas to fading fans, whimsical melodies about hangovers, girls, and moles, bitter diatribes over faith and war..how do blanket that with a consistent mood?

ATYCLB managed to do it.

Whether or not you like each and every song, you have to admit that each and every song feels like it fits on that album. That combined, they tell a story about holding onto the the good things in your life while letting go of the baggage. Of realizing that admitting your faults shows more strength than drenching yourself in bravado and denying your humanity.

That maybe by letting go, you can hold on.. to your music, your wife, your kids, and more importantly, all those fans that the hubub surrounding Pop may have scared away.

Bomb failed to tell a story, although the theme was supposed to be 'coming full circle'. It has some great tracks, and was a little like 'ATYCLB on steroids' - when you realize that steroids may make you bigger, but not necessarily better. It was more of an oak tree than Behind, with the latter being a willow - but we know which of those lasts better through a storm.

 

[astepcloser24]

I thought ATYCLB was an amazing album, though I'm not particularly a fan of 'New York' or 'Peace on Earth'. I also think that the lines at the end of Kite are ridiculous and have nothing to do with the song: "The last of the rock stars / when hip hip drove the big cars / in the time when new media was the big idea / that was the big idea". I liked Bomb when it first came out, but now in retrospect, I wouldn't list it in my top most liked or the best U2 albums. I like it because its the newest and I enjoy 'Vertigo,' 'Original of the Species,' 'Sometimes You Can't Make it On Your Own,' and a few others, but mostly... no.

 

[Niceman]

A long time ago, I was listening to an interview with KRS-One of Boogie-Down Productions fame, where he was giving advice to modern rappers on how to create a memorable rap song.

He said, "mood".

You can have lyrics, you ran rhyme, you can flow, you can have thick beats, all of those things.. but if your song has no mood to it, it won't be memorable, won't be good.

(and he would know - listen to 'Love's Gonna Getcha' and you'll see what he means.)

U2's a band that lives off mood - or emotion, I'd say. Most of their songs have a mood to them, a certain feeling, and most are infused with an strong emotional content.

But what usually makes an entire album an overall hit or miss is the ability to inflect that mood, that overriding emotional appeal, across all the songs, all the lyrics, the photography, the tour, the media.

It's no easy trick when each song by necessity has to be different. How do you take an album that had odes to life and perseverence, laments over lost life, struggles with mid-life crisis and doubt, pleas to fading fans, whimsical melodies about hangovers, girls, and moles, bitter diatribes over faith and war..how do blanket that with a consistent mood?

ATYCLB managed to do it.

Whether or not you like each and every song, you have to admit that each and every song feels like it fits on that album. That combined, they tell a story about holding onto the the good things in your life while letting go of the baggage. Of realizing that admitting your faults shows more strength than drenching yourself in bravado and denying your humanity.

That maybe by letting go, you can hold on.. to your music, your wife, your kids, and more importantly, all those fans that the hubub surrounding Pop may have scared away.

Bomb failed to tell a story. It has some great tracks, and was a little like 'ATYCLB on steroids' - when you realize that steroids may make you bigger, but not necessarily better. It was more of an oak tree than Behind, with that album being a willow - but we know which of those lasts through a storm better.

I agree with your overall point, and I also agree with the criticism of BOMB. BUT, I don't find that my experience of ATYCLB is the same as yours. I never listen to that album all the way through any more. What does the mood matter if the quality of the songs isn't good enough to let me do that? Mostly I listen to In A Little While and the 2006 version of Kite, if I listen to anything from that album at all...

 

[The_Pac_Mule]

hmmm how about

How To Leave Behind an Atomic Bomb
1.City Of Blinding Lights
2.Kite
3.Miracle Drug
4.Walk On (Single Version)
5. Beautiful Day
6. New York
7. In A Little While
8. Sometimes You Can't Make It On Your Own
9. When I Look At The World
10. hmm something filler to end the album...VERTIGO

 

[Utoo]

U2's a band that lives off mood - or emotion, I'd say. Most of their songs have a mood to them, a certain feeling, and most are infused with an strong emotional content.

But what usually makes an entire album an overall hit or miss is the ability to inflect that mood, that overriding emotional appeal, across all the songs, all the lyrics, the photography, the tour, the media.

Great post. I just wanted to highlight this part because it's so true. I think it's U2's ability to write so many great songs that create such a vibrant, palpable mood that really has made them an extraordinary band. It's that ability that has lifted them to a level above a majority of other bands.

The elation of Streets. The building tension of Bad. The squeezing, longing of Electrical Storm. The ache of Please. The rage of Sunday Bloody Sunday. The wallow of Love Is Blindness.

The list can go on.

One of the musical features that creates this is Edge's penchant for minimalism. No solo overdoes it. Notice how so many of the songs that build and build and build never fully release. Bad explodes, but keeps going. WOWY has both a musical and lyrical tension that's never satisfied. Streets has a denouement, but it ends on such a high that you still have room to come down. Electrical Storm tightens and climbs and ends at the top of the cliff.

The ability to create mood and tension, IMO, is what makes U2 masters of their art.

 

[Niceman]

Great post. I just wanted to highlight this part because it's so true. I think it's U2's ability to write so many great songs that create such a vibrant, palpable mood that really has made them an extraordinary band. It's that ability that has lifted them to a level above a majority of other bands.

The elation of Streets. The building tension of Bad. The squeezing, longing of Electrical Storm. The ache of Please. The rage of Sunday Bloody Sunday. The wallow of Love Is Blindness.

The list can go on.

One of the musical features that creates this is Edge's penchant for minimalism. No solo overdoes it. Notice how so many of the songs that build and build and build never fully release. Bad explodes, but keeps going. WOWY has both a musical and lyrical tension that's never satisfied. Streets has a denouement, but it ends on such a high that you still have room to come down. Electrical Storm tightens and climbs and ends at the top of the cliff.

The ability to create mood and tension, IMO, is what makes U2 masters of their art.

Well put!

 

[phillyfan26]

I'm noticing a strange trend on these boards. All of a sudden everyone is extremely critical of How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb and talking about All That You Can't Leave Behind as if it was a masterpiece.

Did I miss something?

You answered your own question in your original post:

(In my opinion)

[/thread]

 

[Niceman]

You answered your own question in your original post:



[/thread]

I don't follow you...... I know I missed something THIS time!

 

[Matthew_Page2000]

I would consider only 5 good songs (IMHO) more than just "trailing off toward the end...." And I actually love every song on The Unforgettable Fire.... THAT'S a masterpiece in my opinion......

Unforgettable Fire was my favorite album for a long while. But you can't seriously call Wire or Indian Summer SKy masterpeices.

 

[phillyfan26]

I don't follow you...... I know I missed something THIS time!

Really?

You answered your question: it's all opinion.

 

[Niceman]

Unforgettable Fire was my favorite album for a long while. But you can't seriously call Wire or Indian Summer SKy masterpeices.

Yes I can....

 

[Niceman]

Really?

You answered your question: it's all opinion.

Well, yeah..... but I think we can discuss subjective opinions.....

 

[jameskinsella]

I completely agree with those who say that an album must have some kind of mood or theme attached to it, for it to succeed as an album. ATYCLB has this. HTDAAB doesn't. Simple as!

ATYCLB has a warm, breezy, optimistic feel to it. HTDAAB has no feel to it at all. I agree that it is simply a collection of songs rather that an album, and "chart" songs at that.

While it would never be my favourite, nor do I think it great, I like ATYCLB and listen to it on occasion. I haven't listened to HTDAAB for years, probably since a month or two after it was released.

I suppose the problem I have with both, though obviously more the latter rather than the former, is that they are middle of the road and can fall into this 'adult contemporary' bracket of music. After HTDAAB came out, I remember young people calling U2 "dad rock." This I found galling. I remember feeling this huge desire to defend them and urging those who said it to me to listen to AB and JT before judging U2. I even gave them my copies - I was that annoyed. This worked and most are now fans with AB being the general favourite

Another point as well, these two albums also got, im my experince, alot of middle-aged people into U2, my own mother being one, who subsequently urged her sisters and friends to buy ATYCLB when it came out. It is now one of their favourites. They are all into "middle of the road" music, as they call it, and make no apology for it. Even they felt HTDAAB was disappointing! I still can't get this image out of my head.

For me, in conclusion;

ATYCLB - very solid, if unspectacular album.
HTDAAB - solid for what it is, but unspectacular and ultimately uninspiring!

I sincerely hope NLOTH is a step in a new direction, and that U2 never return to making these kind of albums again!

 

[Rosebud]

Just a note on the songs cited by the OP and others, though I agree Peace On Earth leaves a lot to be desired, I absolutely love WILATW, Grace, and NY was extraordinary live.

Another reason this album is being seen as a "masterpiece" (as it should, imo) is simply timing. It's a great album no matter what, to me, but it wouldn't have been half as powerful if not for the 9/11 attacks. The events of that time turned this from a great album to an emotional lifeline and catharsis to so many. Fortunately, HTDAAB did not have this opportunity.

 

[digitize]

Unforgettable Fire was my favorite album for a long while. But you can't seriously call Wire or Indian Summer SKy masterpeices.

I can call them whatever the hell I want to.

Doesn't make it true, though.

 

[U2387]

OP: what is wrong with Walk On?? I think its one of their top tier songs.

I agree with your overall premise, though: I feel HTDAAB is superior to ATYCLB, though I do love both albums and feel they get undue criticism in these parts. Any band would kill to have the songs on those 2 albums.

 

[U2DMfan]

That's a matter of taste...

What part of any of this discussion isn't?
You want to talk opinions, then you'll probably get opinions in return.

 

[Niceman]

OP: what is wrong with Walk On?? I think its one of their top tier songs.

I agree with your overall premise, though: I feel HTDAAB is superior to ATYCLB, though I do love both albums and feel they get undue criticism in these parts. Any band would kill to have the songs on those 2 albums.

I don't feel that way. I think it was U2 trying very hard to sound like U2 again. It sounds like work and struggle and it feels clunky to me. There was a time they could do better in their sleep.

 

[Earnie Shavers]

Bomb had singles.

ATYCLB had mood.

Mood usually wins.

Ding! Ding! Ding!

I don’t really think ATYCLB has a consistent mood, but it has a consistent feeling. That might just be Eno, but regardless it’s there, and it means that once you hit ‘stop’ on the stereo or iPod, something sticks with you.

I don’t think ATYCLB is anything close to a great album, by their standards. It’s very weak. But they wanted a breezy pop album, in the tradition of great, true, pop albums, and they did okay.

They had two choices after Pop: Prove the haters wrong, or run back to their base. They chose going back to their base, Edge dusted off his 80s effects peddles, Eno fired up the Moog, they shed pretty much all of the extra weight they were carrying in the 90s in pretty much all areas – whether it’s in the music, or from the simple black and white cover, to the no-effects arena show, even the club promo gigs. The songs were simple, harking back to U2 of 84-89 without too overtly ripping it off. It’s no masterpiece, but they did okay.

Beautiful Day is as good any pop-rock single this decade, or the one before, and the reason is because all good pop singles are more than just a great melody, or catchy riff, or catchy lyric. They need to have a feeling running through them. Show me someone who doesn’t feel like running outside into the sunshine and hugging a stranger when that chorus kicks in, and I’ll show you someone who also likes to hurt puppies.

Walk On is not really to my taste, and some will call it the first of 00s-U2-Anthem-By-Numbers, and while it may be to a degree, it is unlike a Miracle Drug or a Original of the Species in that I will personally pay one of you $100 if you can find me a U2-Anthem-Ripoff by another band (there are hundreds) that is as well written and has such an effortless feel to it. Go now and find one. I can only think of one, but I’m not just going to hand over my cash. Coldplay could do Miracle Drug while actually on drugs. Original of the Species sounds like something Robbie Williams would pay one of his writers good cash for, but even he would do a less cheesy version of it. Walk On? Over the top, but only U2 could pull it off. You don’t have to like it, it can make you cringe as the very nature of these songs often does, but you can’t deny it is pure gold songwriting.

In A Little While is absolutely gorgeous. In the 00s, for me it’s there with Stateless, Ground Beneath and Beautiful Day as their absolute best. I always thought Kite was ‘nice’ but not great, but seeing that live version here in Sydney a few times changed that. F*cking stupid final few lines though. He didn’t need to spell it out. Everyone got it.

Stuck in a Moment – I’d love to hear the gospel version they were working on with Mick Jagger. It’s the only poorly produced/mixed song on the album, but again, I like it’s feel. Again, not my bag, but it’s a well written and oh-so-close to being a well executed pop-gospel song.

Elevation is a waste of time, and the absolutely atrocious Tomb Raider version is Vertigo’s father, so for that alone it should be strung from the nearest lamp-post. Sometimes I love Peace on Earth, sometimes I can’t, depends on the day, kinda weird like that. New York is an average b-side. When I Look at the World is weak, weak, weak. Grace is just really dull. Have I forgotten something?

Anyway, I didn’t mean to write a personal review of the songs, but yeah, ATYCLB has a lasting feeling, which is what all great pop needs. Perfect, memorable pop songs are as hard to write as symphonies. They hit the mark a couple of times on ATYCLB, and narrowly missed it a couple of others.

It is, to me, no surprise that ATYCLB has grown in stature and Atomic Bomb has fallen. I’ve been saying literally since a couple of months after release that Atomic Bomb would slide. Back then it was consistently in peoples top two or three, and now, it’s Interference’s collective 2nd least favourite. Why? It’s the other kind of pop. The all upfront, brash, loud kind. It relies on killer riffs, only catchy melodies and superficial tricks. It’s always f*cking awesome immediately, but washes off very, very, very quickly. Just think about the difference between Vertigo and Beautiful Day. To me, that extends throughout both albums. And it’s a hard thing to nail down. It’s not necessarily in the songwriting. I think that acoustic live Yahweh is great. But Yahweh on the Bomb, I honestly believe it’s the single worst thing they’ve ever committed to record. It is f*cking horrible. But then that’s different to other tracks. Ones like Love and Peace or Miracle Drug, which are either just lazy songwriting from U2, or naked attempts at I don’t want to say what.

Anyway, somewhere in there is my answer. One is good, the other is bad. That’s why!

 

[Earnie Shavers]

I don't feel that way. I think it was U2 trying very hard to sound like U2 again. It sounds like work and struggle and it feels clunky to me. There was a time they could do better in their sleep.

That's exactly what I hear in Atomic Bomb, and not in ATYCLB.

 

[jameskinsella]

Just to add to my previous post.

I suppose my greatest fear, with regard to the previous two albums, but HTDAAB in particular, is that despite always being good and solid 'songsmiths' - they are too talented not to be, U2 would never return to making genuinely inspiring and genuinely artistic albums again. It is my sincerest hope that NLOTH represents a step in the right direction and removes any fears I may have.

A sentiment which may sum up the feelings of many U2 fans I feel.

 

[Niceman]

What part of any of this discussion isn't?
You want to talk opinions, then you'll probably get opinions in return.

Kinda confused where you're coming from with this post... I didn't mean to suggest anything discussed here was anything BUT subjective. I'm just trying very hard to go out of my way to say; this is my opinion. I didn't agree with yours in the quoted text.

 

[Earnie Shavers]

Also, the comment earlier about U2 leaving you hanging on the edge of a cliff is totally true. They used to be masters of letting you know what you want from a song, but never quite giving it to you. Whether that’s literally in the music or in something about the mood or emotion. They either wouldn’t hand it to you, or they’d just give you a just a little bit here and there. Like With or Without You never exploding. Where the Streets Have no Name is pure elation, but it could also have been taken to another level if they wanted to, just blown the thing out. One never clears it’s throat to become a big anthem. The Fly never gives you time to savour it as a super killer riff rock song, it just gets more and more chaotic and then just spits you out. Think about almost every single song from the 80s and 90s. None of them really, truly, give you what you want from them. They just wink it at you and then pull it away, and that's the magic.

That’s a difference with U2 on Atomic Bomb. They are beating you over the head with all the bits you used to want, and I think a lot of people have come to understand that the magic was in them just giving you a glimpse and taking it away again, over and over and over, rather than milking those moments, over and over and over again. That’s why you can keep going back to the great U2 songs decades later and still not be satisfied, whereas a lot of people were bored with the Bomb within a matter of weeks.

I also think it's exactly where bands who mimic U2 have forever gotten it wrong.

 

[Niceman]

Ding! Ding! Ding!

I don’t really think ATYCLB has a consistent mood, but it has a consistent feeling. That might just be Eno, but regardless it’s there, and it means that once you hit ‘stop’ on the stereo or iPod, something sticks with you.

I don’t think ATYCLB is anything close to a great album, by their standards. It’s very weak. But they wanted a breezy pop album, in the tradition of great, true, pop albums, and they did okay.

They had two choices after Pop: Prove the haters wrong, or run back to their base. They chose going back to their base, Edge dusted off his 80s effects peddles, Eno fired up the Moog, they shed pretty much all of the extra weight they were carrying in the 90s in pretty much all areas – whether it’s in the music, or from the simple black and white cover, to the no-effects arena show, even the club promo gigs. The songs were simple, harking back to U2 of 84-89 without too overtly ripping it off. It’s no masterpiece, but they did okay.

Beautiful Day is as good any pop-rock single this decade, or the one before, and the reason is because all good pop singles are more than just a great melody, or catchy riff, or catchy lyric. They need to have a feeling running through them. Show me someone who doesn’t feel like running outside into the sunshine and hugging a stranger when that chorus kicks in, and I’ll show you someone who also likes to hurt puppies.

Walk On is not really to my taste, and some will call it the first of 00s-U2-Anthem-By-Numbers, and while it may be to a degree, it is unlike a Miracle Drug or a Original of the Species in that I will personally pay one of you $100 if you can find me a U2-Anthem-Ripoff by another band (there are hundreds) that is as well written and has such an effortless feel to it. Go now and find one. I can only think of one, but I’m not just going to hand over my cash. Coldplay could do Miracle Drug while actually on drugs. Original of the Species sounds like something Robbie Williams would pay one of his writers good cash for, but even he would do a less cheesy version of it. Walk On? Over the top, but only U2 could pull it off. You don’t have to like it, it can make you cringe as the very nature of these songs often does, but you can’t deny it is pure gold songwriting.

In A Little While is absolutely gorgeous. In the 00s, for me it’s there with Stateless, Ground Beneath and Beautiful Day as their absolute best. I always thought Kite was ‘nice’ but not great, but seeing that live version here in Sydney a few times changed that. F*cking stupid final few lines though. He didn’t need to spell it out. Everyone got it.

Stuck in a Moment – I’d love to hear the gospel version they were working on with Mick Jagger. It’s the only poorly produced/mixed song on the album, but again, I like it’s feel. Again, not my bag, but it’s a well written and oh-so-close to being a well executed pop-gospel song.

Elevation is a waste of time, and the absolutely atrocious Tomb Raider version is Vertigo’s father, so for that alone it should be strung from the nearest lamp-post. Sometimes I love Peace on Earth, sometimes I can’t, depends on the day, kinda weird like that. New York is an average b-side. When I Look at the World is weak, weak, weak. Grace is just really dull. Have I forgotten something?

Anyway, I didn’t mean to write a personal review of the songs, but yeah, ATYCLB has a lasting feeling, which is what all great pop needs. Perfect, memorable pop songs are as hard to write as symphonies. They hit the mark a couple of times on ATYCLB, and narrowly missed it a couple of others.

It is, to me, no surprise that ATYCLB has grown in stature and Atomic Bomb has fallen. I’ve been saying literally since a couple of months after release that Atomic Bomb would slide. Back then it was consistently in peoples top two or three, and now, it’s Interference’s collective 2nd least favourite. Why? It’s the other kind of pop. The all upfront, brash, loud kind. It relies on killer riffs, only catchy melodies and superficial tricks. It’s always f*cking awesome immediately, but washes off very, very, very quickly. Just think about the difference between Vertigo and Beautiful Day. To me, that extends throughout both albums. And it’s a hard thing to nail down. It’s not necessarily in the songwriting. I think that acoustic live Yahweh is great. But Yahweh on the Bomb, I honestly believe it’s the single worst thing they’ve ever committed to record. It is f*cking horrible. But then that’s different to other tracks. Ones like Love and Peace or Miracle Drug, which are either just lazy songwriting from U2, or naked attempts at I don’t want to say what.

Anyway, somewhere in there is my answer. One is good, the other is bad. That’s why!

I actually agree with a lot of what you've said here. Some parts I don't: I don't care for Walk On. Original is amazing to my ears.... But I notice how many of the songs on ALL THAT that you're down on too. You can call an album good that has so many weak tracks? I think this is where you and I separate. If I only like half the songs on the album, I'm not likely to give it a high rank; no matter how solid the lead single is.

Funnily enough, I was disappointed with Vertigo as the lead for HTDAAB. I imagine it was a very easy song for U2 to write. yes, its grown on me over the years, but frankly I don't think it belongs on the album. The rest of the album has a CERTAIN level of cohesiveness, but Vertigo has no family members there. It's the sore thumb. All the same, I think every song on that album is a good song....

 

[jameskinsella]

Also, the comment earlier about U2 leaving you hanging on the edge of a cliff is totally true. They used to be masters of letting you know what you want from a song, but never quite giving it to you. Whether that’s literally in the music or in something about the mood or emotion. They either wouldn’t hand it to you, or they’d just give you a just a little bit here and there. Like With or Without You never exploding. Where the Streets Have no Name is pure elation, but it could also have been taken to another level if they wanted to, just blown the thing out. One never clears it’s throat to become a big anthem. The Fly never gives you time to savour it as a super killer riff rock song, it just gets more and more chaotic and then just spits you out. Think about almost every single song from the 80s and 90s. None of them really, truly, give you what you want from them. They just wink it at you and then pull it away, and that's the magic.

That’s a difference with U2 on Atomic Bomb. They are beating you over the head with all the bits you used to want, and I think a lot of people have come to understand that the magic was in them just giving you a glimpse and taking it away again, over and over and over, rather than milking those moments, over and over and over again. That’s why you can keep going back to the great U2 songs decades later and still not be satisfied, whereas a lot of people were bored with the Bomb within a matter of weeks.

I also think it's exactly where bands who mimic U2 have forever gotten it wrong.

In complete agreement with you here Earnie.

 

[Earnie Shavers]

II'm not likely to give it a high rank

I don't actually rank ATYCLB very high. At all. I just think of their two pop albums of the 00s, they got part of it right on ATYCLB - a great pop feeling.

 

[Earnie Shavers]

In complete agreement with you here Earnie.

Just thinking about it further, a couple of things...

One, I can only think of one pre-00s U2 song where they hand you the whole thing on a platter: Pride. And, well, Pride should be proud, no?

Think about With or Without You, if it were written Bomb style. I imagine it would have come out sounding like Miracle Drug. With or Without You stays low, stays calm. Miracle Drug starts out that way, but BOOM! within not 30 seconds we're off "THE SONGS ARE IN..." etc. At the end, With or Without You, having not yet exploded, just backs quietly out of the room. Miracle Drug winds itself down too. Here is where you are left wanting from With or Without You. You want Edge to launch, and Bono to give it a belting finale, but they don't do it. Miracle Drug? BOOM! Off they go.

Another piece of their genius though is that they often let those songs do it live. Again, with With or Without You, they generally do give it a big finale. I doubt they've thought it through, but it's a clever trick, probably a great part of why we all love them on record, but adore them live. It used to be the only place U2 would give you the meal, not just a taste.

 

[U2DMfan]

Kinda confused where you're coming from with this post... I didn't mean to suggest anything discussed here was anything BUT subjective. I'm just trying very hard to go out of my way to say; this is my opinion. I didn't agree with yours in the quoted text.

I'm pointing out to you that you responded to my opinions with "that's a matter of taste" which implies that somewhere in this discussion there lies something that is not subjective.

I take it you were just stating the obvious then? Okay fine.

On to the point, I don't really feel much like bickering over the distinction between the quality of two albums that I see very much in the same creative vein. How those songs are received is certainly nothing but subjective, to talk about other aspects of the songs, how creative they are in terms of musicianship, the artistic aim of the material...it's all very similar.

I am talked out on this issue, so I probably should have just taken a pass.

 

[Niceman]

I'm pointing out to you that you responded to my opinions with "that's a matter of taste" which implies that somewhere in this discussion there lies something that is not subjective.

I take it you were just stating the obvious then? Okay fine.

On to the point, I don't really feel much like bickering over the distinction between the quality of two albums that I see very much in the same creative vein. How those songs are received is certainly nothing but subjective, to talk about other aspects of the songs, how creative they are in terms of musicianship, the artistic aim of the material...it's all very similar.

I am talked out on this issue, so I probably should have just taken a pass.

Hopefully in a few weeks we'll just be talking about how awesome the new album is!