I'd say Spoon's album was less daring than U2's since it's more like what they've done before. But it's a better album because they're clearly still on top of their game in terms of songwriting/hooks. To argue that for U2 based on SOI would be laughable, but I'll certainly want to read such an opinion...
The funny thing about SO many U2 songs is that I wouldn't think they'd be hits. It's almost like U2 succeeded in spite of their writing styles.
For example, WOWY has no refrain, yet is a huge hit. ISHFWILF not only has a long title, but it's a song about faith (or faith lost) and upon first listen, I never would have predicted it to hit #1 in the U.S. (at best, I might have said Top 40). While Desire and Mysterious Ways leapt out as catchy tunes, the subject matter was also challenging (lust, drugs, spirtuality). Granted, I'm abnormal here, but when I first heard "One", I hated it and skipped over the track for the longest time (it eventually wore me down - the live performances helped).
Then we go to songs like TUF, One Tree Hill, When Love Comes..., Who's Gonna Ride..., Numb, Lemon, If God Will Send..., Stuck..., Sometimes..., etc. and most were hits (at some level), even reaching #1 in some countries. But when I heard these songs, none leap out as single material.
So U2 may find success with some of these SoI songs that do not sound like singles. U2 may have had more success with Pop and NLOTH tracks too, had they release different first singles. The poor first single choice ruined it for both the album and subsequent singles. I think the right song was chosen this time and if U2 follow it with EBW, then I feel SoI will be viewed as a success.
