LemonMelon
More 5G Than Man
This thread idea popped in my head after days of reading through the Achtung Baby/HTDAAB production comparison thread, along with a bunch of conversation in the superthreads about restructuring track listings and which albums we wouldn't touch.
U2, in my mind, has never been, nor ever will be a brilliant studio band. However, IMO, they are (outside of perhaps The Who) the greatest rock band of all time in a live setting. Because of this my expectations for the albums themselves are set rather low. I mostly just want a good, enjoyable set of songs that can be expanded on live, but I wouldn't complain if I got a work of art, obviously.
As you can expect, there are very few U2 albums that I honestly believe could not be realistically improved in the areas of sequencing, song choice, and production, but I can't deny that they have done it once or twice.
Please note: this thread is NOT for bashing albums. If you dislike an album, please discuss why and in what way you would go about improving it. Essentially: constructive criticism ONLY.
Boy
This is one of the few records I would not touch. How many debut albums are this vital, influential, and consistently refreshing? The songs are great, and I really can't think of too many b-sides I would add in. I'm all for sprawl, but I love how tight this record is. It takes me by surprise with every listen.
October
On a base level, I feel this is U2's most obviously botched album. It was rushed, poorly thought out, and leaves me unsatisfied most of the time. The production and sequencing are OK (outside of Fire--->Tomorrow and Scarlet--->Is That All, which are simply horrible segues), but it's hard to ignore the unfinished arrangements and lackluster lyrics.
War
Another one that I feel is generally perfect. The sequencing makes the album feel a bit top-heavy in the area of rockers, but the production sounds great and, based on the b-sides and demos available, there's not much I'd add or subtract. Very good album.
The Unforgettable Fire
Like Pop, it's easy to appreciate this album for what it is, obvious flaws and all, but yes, there are flaws. After a superb, coherent first half, this album flails in the second half thanks to horrific sequencing (Bad--->Indian Summer Sky--->Elvis--->MLK??? Ugh...) and poor song choices. 4th Of July is arguably the worst instrumental U2 made during that period, so why is it here? Where is Love Comes Tumbling? Why is EPAA 6.5 minutes long, though it's essentially the same thing over and over? ISS could be placed just about anywhere else on the album and be more effective, and MLK shouldn't be its own track; it should be used as an intro for another one. UF is a mess, but it's a fascinating mess.
The Joshua Tree
Pretty much perfect. I even like the sequencing.
Rattle And Hum
Basically, this album should have been treated as a proper album instead of a soundtrack to a film. The live songs ruin the flow and negate the musical theme running through the new songs. The production is very good though, and they did the best they could with the sequencing; it was bound to be terrible no matter what they did.
Achtung Baby
Production-wise, this album is a travesty. When you can barely hear the most interesting thing about the album musically (the guitar), you know something has gone horribly wrong. The album sounds muddy and the mixing is awful. All reports we have show that this area of the album was largely cobbled together at the last minute. However, on a base level (the songwriting, performances, etc) I feel this album is pretty much perfect. It's very well thought out, sequenced, and loaded with great songs. The b-sides were wisely left as b-sides. It's a shame that, though the least important part was botched, it was still botched.
Zooropa
Another album I'm pretty sure is about as good as it was going to get. Waiting a couple more years to release this could have made the album stranger, but not necessarily better.
Passengers: Original Soundtracks 1
Outside of a meandering second half (that fails to cohere with the first) they did a great job with this one. The first half is a brilliant suite of songs that has largely gone unmatched in U2's catalogue in the areas of creativity and atmosphere. I sort of have the same complaints I did with UF, but there isn't any evidence to suggest that the best songs were left off the album.
Pop
I am tempted to consider this one "perfectly imperfect", as I love it just the way it is, but it's still imperfect, and I'm curious to know how an extra month of work could have improved these songs. The sequencing is OK, and the production is fascinating, but a few songs could use stronger arrangements.
All That You Can't Leave Behind
Definitely flawed. From the get go, the sequencing is terrible. It's always a bad sign when all of the hits are right in the front and they're all of different tempos. The second half coheres OK, but by then the damage is done. Terrible. Also, the production simply does not work on many occasions. Songs like Elevation need to sound rough, not set for Girls Aloud to harmonize over. Thankfully, intriguing quirks such as Edge's guitar noodling in Peace On Earth and New York make those songs more fascinating than they would be otherwise.
How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb
I feel that this record is about as polished as it's going to get, but that's part of the problem. ATYCLB was meant to be a set of great pop songs. This album doesn't have any particular musical theme, so I am of the opinion that they should have gone for sprawl and unloaded those demos from the previous sessions onto this one. It could have been brilliant. As it is, it's a very strong, yet somehow uninteresting set that was recorded far too loudly. Smile, Love You Like Mad, Are You Gonna Wait Forever, Fast Cars, Mercy and a couple of those alternate versions could have made this album so much stronger.
So, at the moment, the U2 albums I wouldn't attempt to fix are:
Boy
War
The Joshua Tree
Zooropa
Passengers
U2, in my mind, has never been, nor ever will be a brilliant studio band. However, IMO, they are (outside of perhaps The Who) the greatest rock band of all time in a live setting. Because of this my expectations for the albums themselves are set rather low. I mostly just want a good, enjoyable set of songs that can be expanded on live, but I wouldn't complain if I got a work of art, obviously.
As you can expect, there are very few U2 albums that I honestly believe could not be realistically improved in the areas of sequencing, song choice, and production, but I can't deny that they have done it once or twice.Please note: this thread is NOT for bashing albums. If you dislike an album, please discuss why and in what way you would go about improving it. Essentially: constructive criticism ONLY.
Boy
This is one of the few records I would not touch. How many debut albums are this vital, influential, and consistently refreshing? The songs are great, and I really can't think of too many b-sides I would add in. I'm all for sprawl, but I love how tight this record is. It takes me by surprise with every listen.
October
On a base level, I feel this is U2's most obviously botched album. It was rushed, poorly thought out, and leaves me unsatisfied most of the time. The production and sequencing are OK (outside of Fire--->Tomorrow and Scarlet--->Is That All, which are simply horrible segues), but it's hard to ignore the unfinished arrangements and lackluster lyrics.
War
Another one that I feel is generally perfect. The sequencing makes the album feel a bit top-heavy in the area of rockers, but the production sounds great and, based on the b-sides and demos available, there's not much I'd add or subtract. Very good album.
The Unforgettable Fire
Like Pop, it's easy to appreciate this album for what it is, obvious flaws and all, but yes, there are flaws. After a superb, coherent first half, this album flails in the second half thanks to horrific sequencing (Bad--->Indian Summer Sky--->Elvis--->MLK??? Ugh...) and poor song choices. 4th Of July is arguably the worst instrumental U2 made during that period, so why is it here? Where is Love Comes Tumbling? Why is EPAA 6.5 minutes long, though it's essentially the same thing over and over? ISS could be placed just about anywhere else on the album and be more effective, and MLK shouldn't be its own track; it should be used as an intro for another one. UF is a mess, but it's a fascinating mess.
The Joshua Tree
Pretty much perfect. I even like the sequencing.
Rattle And Hum
Basically, this album should have been treated as a proper album instead of a soundtrack to a film. The live songs ruin the flow and negate the musical theme running through the new songs. The production is very good though, and they did the best they could with the sequencing; it was bound to be terrible no matter what they did.
Achtung Baby
Production-wise, this album is a travesty. When you can barely hear the most interesting thing about the album musically (the guitar), you know something has gone horribly wrong. The album sounds muddy and the mixing is awful. All reports we have show that this area of the album was largely cobbled together at the last minute. However, on a base level (the songwriting, performances, etc) I feel this album is pretty much perfect. It's very well thought out, sequenced, and loaded with great songs. The b-sides were wisely left as b-sides. It's a shame that, though the least important part was botched, it was still botched.
Zooropa
Another album I'm pretty sure is about as good as it was going to get. Waiting a couple more years to release this could have made the album stranger, but not necessarily better.
Passengers: Original Soundtracks 1
Outside of a meandering second half (that fails to cohere with the first) they did a great job with this one. The first half is a brilliant suite of songs that has largely gone unmatched in U2's catalogue in the areas of creativity and atmosphere. I sort of have the same complaints I did with UF, but there isn't any evidence to suggest that the best songs were left off the album.
Pop
I am tempted to consider this one "perfectly imperfect", as I love it just the way it is, but it's still imperfect, and I'm curious to know how an extra month of work could have improved these songs. The sequencing is OK, and the production is fascinating, but a few songs could use stronger arrangements.
All That You Can't Leave Behind
Definitely flawed. From the get go, the sequencing is terrible. It's always a bad sign when all of the hits are right in the front and they're all of different tempos. The second half coheres OK, but by then the damage is done. Terrible. Also, the production simply does not work on many occasions. Songs like Elevation need to sound rough, not set for Girls Aloud to harmonize over. Thankfully, intriguing quirks such as Edge's guitar noodling in Peace On Earth and New York make those songs more fascinating than they would be otherwise.
How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb
I feel that this record is about as polished as it's going to get, but that's part of the problem. ATYCLB was meant to be a set of great pop songs. This album doesn't have any particular musical theme, so I am of the opinion that they should have gone for sprawl and unloaded those demos from the previous sessions onto this one. It could have been brilliant. As it is, it's a very strong, yet somehow uninteresting set that was recorded far too loudly. Smile, Love You Like Mad, Are You Gonna Wait Forever, Fast Cars, Mercy and a couple of those alternate versions could have made this album so much stronger.
So, at the moment, the U2 albums I wouldn't attempt to fix are:
Boy
War
The Joshua Tree
Zooropa
Passengers
Perhaps LNOE could fit in between Staring At The Sun and Angels. That is a rather large gap between singles to U2 standards.
