U2 At Their Peak

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
around the period of Unforgettable Fire - Rattle & Hum

they even produced quality b-sides back then :wow:
 
gvox said:


February 3, 1995 3:04 a.m.

The master of profound discussion-culture is shining again. But I guess, that's what you call humour ...:eyebrow:

Regarding the thread's topic: For me, it is definetly the period from '84 until '93. A peak, maybe their all-time peak – while there are of course other creative heights unti today and hopefully tomorrow...
 
Are we all assuming U2 won't be break their peak of JT?

Next album will be the peak, write it in your history books kids.
 
I'd say if it was a moment it was Achtung/Zooropa/ZooTV. You can argue JT as a better album (not personally, but it's obviously a fair argument), but for a moment in time where the band were just bursting from all angles creatively, it's that little run. Two albums wildly different from both each other and everything they had done before, that tour and everything about it, just an explosion really. Their 'peak' though I think is stretched out from JT-Zooropa. Really, it's about 6 years give or take a few months. Take the period of time from the release of JT to the end of the ZooTV tour and it fits in roughly with the timeframe from ATYCLB release to the end of the Vertigo tour. Compare those two periods and everything that happened in them.
 
Creativity doesn't necessarily equal productivity.

If we're going to say most productive, you've got to admit that the output of early '87 to mid '89 was amazing -- two albums, seven singles stuffed with B-sides, an incredible world tour.

Most creative absolutely has to be Zoo TV however. The completely new direction of the band, the songs, the tour, the two albums -- as well as the cohesion of the whole thing -- is certainly their creative high point. They were fairly productive too -- five singles off AB and a few from Zooropa (1 or 2, depending on where you lived), though the remixes definitely took the sheen off the B sides' shine.
 
It depends on what period of time is fair to isolate, but I'll plug for 1986 to 1988 (and yes, 1989 live). They were obviously awesome before 1986, but I don't think they were great musicians until 1987 or so (I think Eno said as much), and they still had not made one album that galvanized the masses until Joshua Tree. If you look at how many truly great (not just good) songs they wrote and recorded in the 26-28 months between early '86 and summer/fall 1988, it's pretty damn impressive. This includes all of the Joshua Tree, its many quality B-sides (some clearly on par with the album itself), Rattle & Hum's 9 new songs, and R&H's many good B-sides. It takes them twice that long now to produce one 11-track album.

The only other 2-3 year period that comes close is the one immediately after: say, late 1990 to early 1992. They were certainly going through some special creative processes when recording Achtung Baby, and it was an amazingly fertile time.

But I give the nod to 1986 to 1988 because there were more MORE great tracks produced.
 
To me if it wasn't for U2's 90's, i wouldn't be a huge fan really. Sure the joshua tree was excellent, but reinventing themselves and changing their image was far more exciting
 
Someone made a good point very early on, that their best albums have come from very different points of their career.

In terms of creative peaks, I still think the Achtung Baby --> Pop period would take some beating.
 
would a fair argument be that until ATYCLB they had been on a real creative arc. Pushing forward from one album to the next (bar maybe R&H). Until ATYCLB I can't really recall that they ever made a conscious decision to draw on their past achievements or previous sounds.

Surely this is the sign of creativity and originality. Although, and I'm going to argue against myself here, I'm not sure whether ATYCLB was an attempt to sound more like "U2" in that their creative trajectory had slowed, anymore than it was a commercial decision made to ramp up their popularity after Pop. Or maybe a decision made to actually keep the band together and ground them for the next decade...

What I do sometimes think about though is that ALYCLB is actually their most unnatural album, it didn't creatively flow from previous work. And I think that this wrong-footed them to a certain extent, this then led to HTDAAB which recording wise I get the impression they were never comfortable with (different producers etc). You can hear snippets of experimental sounds almost being fought off by a straightforward rock sound. Hence I think some of Bono's ridiculous soundbites from later on in the sessions (heavy rock, etc) were actually the sound he "wanted" but never quite achieved. You only have to look at the 70's punk rock cover to HTDAAB, it completely betrays the music on the record IMO.

I'm really optimistic about this new album because I think that for the first time since Pop, popularity and radioplay won't be the driving factors. They proved something to themselves with the last 2 records IMO and laid some demons to rest. Now they probably feel a sense of creative freedom again...

Oh I don't know... :eyebrow:
 
Last edited:
chrissybaby said:


I'm really optimistic about this new album because I think that for the first time since Pop, popularity and radioplay won't be the driving factors. They proved something to themselves with the last 2 records IMO and laid some demons to rest. Now they probably feel a sense of creative freedom again...

Oh I don't know... :eyebrow:

Hell, yes!
 
Bonos voice at his peak - COH tour/now

Edge's guitar at his peak - gets better and better as the years go on

u2's peak 1987-1993
 
I'd probably say Achtung Baby - ZooTV period, even though it's not my personal favourite.

It would have been 1987-1993 if it wasn't for R&H. They've done some fantastic songs in that time, but overall I think that album/film was definitely a valley.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom