Which is the better album - Pop or Zooropa?

[devir]

They are my 2 favourite U2 albums and I for the life of me can't decide which I like better because they are both effect me equally. I feel like Pop was heavier and has more depth than Zooropa but Zooropa is artistically a more clever album, while Pop contains greater high points than Zooropa (Mofo, Gone, DYFL), however Pop has greater low points (Miami/Playboy Mansion).

How to you even begin to compare the two albums? They are both probably the pinnacle of the band's creativity.

 

[AndrewCowley]

Playboy Mansion is not a low point. Love that song. Different style for U2 and they made it work.

Also the snippet tacked onto the end of Streets was epic

 

[devir]

Playboy Mansion is not a low point. Love that song. Different style for U2 and they made it work.

I like the Playboy Mansion, and Miami but are they better than Babyface, The First Time, Dirty Day or Numb -
arguably the lower tracks on Zooropa - which are still flipping great?

Personally, I don't think so. Playboy Mansion and Miami are perhaps the weakest across both the albums.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

A wet turd is better than baby face

 

[Kieran McConville]

I celebrate their entire catalogue.

 

[kabigon]

Zooropa has more songs that work best in the context of the album but that you probably wouldn't listen to separately (Babyface, Numb, Daddy's Gonna Pay, Some Days, The Wanderer). From start to finish it works.

There's not much I dislike about Pop, except of course that we barely have any live versions of its songs since 2001 that might inspire new perspectives on the studio iterations.

 

[elevated_u2_fan]

A wet turd is better than baby face

omg yes

I like Pop more for sentimental reasons but I would say Zooropa is a better album.

 

[Mac_Fly]

How to you even begin to compare the two albums?

Like this:

Zooropa was an EP stretched into a full album (it shows).

POP was the band continuing with electronica and experimentation until they ran out of ideas after the first three songs (it shows).

Still . . . Zooropa hangs together conceptually a bit better.

So Zooropa.

 

[YBORCITY]

I celebrate their entire catalogue.

Well said, indeed.

I would have to give Zooropa the edge but not by much....

 

[prbiker15]

Zooropa, although Pop isn’t that far behind.

Zooropa has more songs that work best in the context of the album but that you probably wouldn't listen to separately (Babyface, Numb, Daddy's Gonna Pay, Some Days, The Wanderer). From start to finish it works.

Yep, basically this.

 

[lazarus]

I think Zooropa is more focused sonically, but Pop more focused thematically with the lyrics. I disagree with the original poster about Pop having higher high points; Zooropa, Stay, and Lemon are all better than anything on Pop IMO and would all be in my personal Top 10 U2 tracks. But Pop seems to pack more weight as it wraps up, with Please and Wake Up Dead Man making for a considerably more powerful finish than Dirty Day and The Wanderer.

So I really go back and forth. If you asked me which one better represents the creative peak of the band, it’s Zooropa. Yet I feel like I’ve had a more substantial meal when Pop ends, as it has the benefit of being longer and has more good-to-great tracks (I enjoy all the songs on both albums a lot). Maybe the deciding factor is that regardless of how much any of us may love Pop, we know that it was born through a kind of aesthetic compromise that the band didn’t previously practice, that the band was rushing to complete while still scaling back on their initial experimentation. In that sense, Zooropa is a purer work and that might give it the slight advantage—artists on top of the world, pushing the envelope and not giving a fuck how it was going to fit into the mainstream marketplace. The release of Numb as the lead single only underlined that ethos.

 

[devir]

A wet turd is better than baby face

Your kidding right? babyface is a sonic gem, the picture it paints is perfect, it's a song which showcases U2 at the peak of their creativity and experimentation

 

[brooklynmike]

I love Babyface. I never understood the hate it gets here. Is it the music? Lyrics? Subject matter?

 

[lazarus]

I like it a lot as well. The rhythm section on it is fantastic.

 

[digitize]

Babyface is pretty much just making fun of porn, right? Given the subject, I feel like it works pretty well.

 

[Rachel D.]

I listen to both of them more often than I listen to Achtung Baby.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Your kidding right? babyface is a sonic gem, the picture it paints is perfect, it's a song which showcases U2 at the peak of their creativity and experimentation

I am not.

It's dog shit.

 

[MrPryck2U]

Pop is better.

 

[LemonMelon]

Pop has actually dropped a little bit in my esteem in recent years because the album's lack of sonic/musical cohesion makes it a less consistent experience than its predecessors. With Zooropa, I feel like I need to strap in to prepare for a wild ride that takes me where U2 had never gone before for a sustained 50 minutes. With Pop, I feel like they mix some successful gambles (Do You Feel Loved, Mofo, Wake Up Dead Man) and conciliatory measures meant to keep things somewhat familiar (IGWSHA, Staring at the Sun). The album never finds its footing for longer than 3-4 songs in a row, as it's constantly switching gears to encompass the wide range of sounds they were attempting. Bono has some dud lines here and there also, but the good vastly outweighs the bad on that front. He has a lot to say on here, which was one of the last times that was the case.

Meanwhile, the sound and lyricism of Zooropa is perfect. Not all of the songs are perfect, but everything feels of the same eccentric piece. The highs are the highest of their career IMO (Zooropa, Stay and Lemon are all in my top 10) and the relative lows are still fun and engaging. The sound is rich and Bono brings a thoughtful, critical eye to his words and characters. It's a masterpiece, the result of a great band with swagger and full command of their ideas and talents. By the time it wraps up with The Wanderer, I feel like the band has done an incredible job of painting their beautiful sonic landscape, a place full of promise, possibility, coldness and isolation with humanity buried somewhere in the center.

 

[lazarus]

Looks like we're very much on the same page. One additional point you made is the erratic nature of the track listing, and correct me if I'm wrong but isn't this the first time there seemed to be some late-in-the-game changes, the start of a recurring trend that has affected every album since? I seem to recall a Bono interview where he mentioned the album originally opening with Mofo and "three dance tracks in a row" or something, but they were worried it might be too shocking to the listener. This is the same band that released Numb as a lead single.

So I think you could alleviate some of your issues if you tried reordering the songs; I had a custom playlist a while back but I don't think I have it anymore (it had Holy Joe, North and South of the River, and I'm Not Your Baby, which probably took it over the standard CD limit).

Of course, you're still left with an unfocused overall sound compared to Zooropa, but it may go down a little smoother.

 

[kabigon]

I took an early set where most of the songs were still being played, added Wake Up Dead Man to the end and The Playboy Mansion, then shuffled it around a bit. Kept Mofo and Discotheque as side A/B openers.

Mofo
Do You Feel Loved
Miami
Last Night on Earth
The Playboy Mansion
Gone

Discotheque
If You Wear That Velvet Dress
If God Will Send His Angels
Please
Staring at the Sun
Wake Up Dead Man

 

[trevgreg]

Pop has actually dropped a little bit in my esteem in recent years because the album's lack of sonic/musical cohesion makes it a less consistent experience than its predecessors. With Zooropa, I feel like I need to strap in to prepare for a wild ride that takes me where U2 had never gone before for a sustained 50 minutes. With Pop, I feel like they mix some successful gambles (Do You Feel Loved, Mofo, Wake Up Dead Man) and conciliatory measures meant to keep things somewhat familiar (IGWSHA, Staring at the Sun). The album never finds its footing for longer than 3-4 songs in a row, as it's constantly switching gears to encompass the wide range of sounds they were attempting. Bono has some dud lines here and there also, but the good vastly outweighs the bad on that front. He has a lot to say on here, which was one of the last times that was the case.

Meanwhile, the sound and lyricism of Zooropa is perfect. Not all of the songs are perfect, but everything feels of the same eccentric piece. The highs are the highest of their career IMO (Zooropa, Stay and Lemon are all in my top 10) and the relative lows are still fun and engaging. The sound is rich and Bono brings a thoughtful, critical eye to his words and characters. It's a masterpiece, the result of a great band with swagger and full command of their ideas and talents. By the time it wraps up with The Wanderer, I feel like the band has done an incredible job of painting their beautiful sonic landscape, a place full of promise, possibility, coldness and isolation with humanity buried somewhere in the center.

Great post here.

I'm not quite as high on the opinion of Zooropa as some people on here. But I probably come back a bit more often to the Zooropa songs than I do for Pop ones these days... I'd normally go with Pop, but it might be closer to a draw right now.

 

[Catman]

definitely Zooropa (it's probably Top 3 material for me)

 

[namkcuR]

I think I agree that Zooropa is the more cohesive artistic statement as a whole. The cohesive whole, a handful of all-time level tracks(title track, Lemon, Stay, Dirty Day), and the colorful artwork(it's probably in my top two or three favorite album covers of theirs) all lead me to think it's a more satisfying piece of art on the whole than Pop, despite Pop's many incredible songs.

There's also the mystique around it, how they made it in a way that was so very un-U2 - in the middle of a tour, flying back and forth from gigs to finish it, no time to second-guess, re-record, change producers, etc, just from nothing to finished album in six months, pure inspiration and confidence coming off AB and ZooTV. Very much the opposite of Pop. The chapters in "U2 At The End Of The World" dealing the recording of the album are maybe my favorite part of that book.

Looks like we're very much on the same page. One additional point you made is the erratic nature of the track listing, and correct me if I'm wrong but isn't this the first time there seemed to be some late-in-the-game changes, the start of a recurring trend that has affected every album since? I seem to recall a Bono interview where he mentioned the album originally opening with Mofo and "three dance tracks in a row" or something, but they were worried it might be too shocking to the listener. This is the same band that released Numb as a lead single.

So I think you could alleviate some of your issues if you tried reordering the songs; I had a custom playlist a while back but I don't think I have it anymore (it had Holy Joe, North and South of the River, and I'm Not Your Baby, which probably took it over the standard CD limit).

Yeah, and you can achieve the cohesion in multiple ways. You can make it more full-on in the Mofo/DYFL/Miami direction, or you can make it hew more towards that SATS/LNOE direction. For example...

The former:

1. Mofo
2. Discotheque
3. Do You Feel Loved
4. Staring At The Sun(Monster Truck mix, from the single)
5. Holy Joe(Guilty Mix)
6. If God Will Send His Angels(Big Yam AKA Grand Jury mix)
7. Gone
8. Miami
9. I'm Not Your Baby(w/Sinead)
10. Velvet Dress
11. Please(album version)
12. North And South Of The River

The latter, a more straight ahead rock affair:

1. HMTMKMKM
2. Gone
3. Discotheque
4. Do You Feel Loved
5. If God Will Send His Angels(album version)
6. Staring At The Sun(album version)
7. Holy Joe(Garage Mix)
8. Last Night On Earth
9. Playboy Mansion
10. Velvet Dress
11. Please(single version)
12. Wake Up Dead Man

 

[tongueinmyear]

Would have always said Pop, but over recent years Zooropa slowly climbing in my ranking.

Zooropa just a much easier listen, you can feel that they were laid back about the whole thing and it's great to hear. Flows much better than Pop too. Just picking a few key songs from each:

First track: Zooropa beats Discotheque as an album opener every day.
The uber experimental track: Numb and Mofo probably pretty level pegging. I slightly prefer Numb.
Emotional peak: Stay vs SATS/Please? Either way Stay wins, has always been a personal favourite.
Album closer: Wanderer vs Wake Up Dead Man. Probably pretty even, but again personally I prefer Wanderer.

So based on that highly scientific analysis, Zooropa.

 

[dk42]

Honestly, this is a very difficult question. 90s U2 is one of my favorite things ever, so it was a decade of high points for me as they could virtually do no wrong during this era for me.

I tend to gravitate towards Pop more these days with the dark cynicism creeping over it making it the perfect record. I mean, the band known for big anthems writes a song like Wake Up Dead Man, what a punch to the gut. In 1997, it was maybe a bit off for some, but in 2018...whoa. This album would've killed today and it's so depressing to see the band pretty much ignore it.

Both records still sound great and the production has generally held up. The song Zooropa sounds stellar, most especially on a set of headphones, it's really atmospheric and adventurous.

The two songs about Bono's mother, Lemon from Zooropa and Mofo from Pop hit hard in different ways. Unique musical territory for the band and sound unlike anything they've done. The dancey, upbeat music contrasting the heavy lyrics. Also, the Lemon video rules.

I think Zooropa expands upon what Achtung Baby was doing and taking their sound in even more interesting and daring directions. Pop goes in a slightly different direction, amping up the dance influences.

Now Popmart vs. Zoo TV is a major challenge and they're two tours I would've killed to witness. I'd probably give Zoo TV the edge though, just because of how much it changed the game and was like nothing before it. Its presentation, Bono's characters, the performances, simply put..they were on fire.

 

[U2girl]

Zooropa. Thematically and sonically more cohesive.

 

[Zoocoustic]

Zooropa, to me, was the creative peak of U2. As has been said, they were so confident in what they were doing. And that confidence is manifest in a strong way in every aspect of the album, tour, image, artwork, lyrics, music, characters, interviews, etc.

For me, U2’s entire career could have consisted only of the years 1991-1993, and I’d still consider them my favorite band.

 

[gweeps]

Zooropa reminds me of The Unforgettable Fire. Both have an unfinished quality to them. I like it though.

 

[The_acrobat]

Honestly, this is a very difficult question. 90s U2 is one of my favorite things ever, so it was a decade of high points for me as they could virtually do no wrong during this era for me.

I tend to gravitate towards Pop more these days with the dark cynicism creeping over it making it the perfect record. I mean, the band known for big anthems writes a song like Wake Up Dead Man, what a punch to the gut. In 1997, it was maybe a bit off for some, but in 2018...whoa. This album would've killed today and it's so depressing to see the band pretty much ignore it.

Both records still sound great and the production has generally held up. The song Zooropa sounds stellar, most especially on a set of headphones, it's really atmospheric and adventurous.

The two songs about Bono's mother, Lemon from Zooropa and Mofo from Pop hit hard in different ways. Unique musical territory for the band and sound unlike anything they've done. The dancey, upbeat music contrasting the heavy lyrics. Also, the Lemon video rules.

I think Zooropa expands upon what Achtung Baby was doing and taking their sound in even more interesting and daring directions. Pop goes in a slightly different direction, amping up the dance influences.

Now Popmart vs. Zoo TV is a major challenge and they're two tours I would've killed to witness. I'd probably give Zoo TV the edge though, just because of how much it changed the game and was like nothing before it. Its presentation, Bono's characters, the performances, simply put..they were on fire.

I’d give Zoo TV the edge over Popmart as well. I was 10-11 during Zoo TV, and didn’t really get into U2 until 1995, so of course I never saw that. My aunt saw Zoo TV in Cleveland (as well as the original Joshua Tree in Cleveland) and I’ve always been jealous! If I had a time machine, probably the first thing I’d do is go back and see a Zoo show. A total game changer!

I saw Popmart though. I will never forget walking into the Ohio State stadium and just being BLOWN AWAY at how big the stage was. I was 15, and it was my first ever concert. Talk about setting the bar high! My 2nd concert was about a year later, an Aerosmith show for which I had extremely high expectations, but it was like watching a bar band by comparison to Popmart. Over the years since, I’ve been to over 100 concerts (14 U2 shows total!), and I realize that U2 shows are just a different animal than most other concerts. I’ve had some absolutely amazing nights seeing other bands, but nobody does it like U2.

Pop is definitely my favorite U2 album. It just resonates with me on so many levels.