You're the Best Thing About Me - Song Discussion

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
The last time U2 took any kind of risk musically was NLOTH...and even then it was a calculated, compromised risk. I still regard NLOTH as the last real U2 record. They're a shell of what they have been (and could still be), without Eno & Lanois.

I agree although you might argue that "Pop" was the last record that was truly risky and sounded nothing like any of its predecessor albums. NLOTH was only risky in the sense that Brian Eno added so many bells and whistles. I still hear a lot of classic U2 on that record.
 
I agree although you might argue that "Pop" was the last record that was truly risky and sounded nothing like any of its predecessor albums. NLOTH was only risky in the sense that Brian Eno added so many bells and whistles. I still hear a lot of classic U2 on that record.

Pop was more of a risk, sure. But in both cases U2 was coming off two wildly successful albums, at the height of their popularity, and trying to go in a somewhat different direction.

I do, however, disagree with your characterisation that what Eno brought to that record (or any U2 record) was merely "bells & whistles". Eno, along with Daniel Lanois, was a full collaborator on NLOTH, and what he brings is a lot more than just just sonic tricks.

And "classic U2", at least classic U2 post War, owes a big part of its sound to Eno & Lanois. In fact, I think you could make the argument that, musically speaking, Brian and Danny have been more important to the sound of U2 than Adam and Larry.
 
SOI is a lot more experimental and risky than given credit for - despite some glossy production in parts. The last half is amazing. And then you add Lucifer's Hands and Crystal Ballroom and that's an incredible run of music.
 
Well well well.... It's a long time I've been around on this forum and even longer that I was here every day. :) But - U2 are back and so am I.
I want to tell other U2 Fans my thoughts as I am the only fan within friends and family.
I heard the song a few days ago on the radio and my first thought was:
not bad - sounds like a song from SOI... Catchy tune... They've done worse. *LOL*
I found out that only hearing it two or three times it already stuck in my mind, which is normaly also a good thing. Okay... it's a Pop song, we'll get over it. :)

Then I saw the Jimmy appearance and I was blown away. Especially the line The Edge sings gave me goosebumps. Can't even explain why - maybe the way it probably was The Edge watching Bono and his love for Ali. Whatever - since then I am very excited for the rest of the album...

Beeing fan since around 2000 I had hard times with them and HTDAAB and NLOTH (I know that many fans love NLOTH - I just don't) but luckly they had a huge back cataloge which I could buy backwards.
But then with SOI I was just jumping up and down thinking it's one of there best albums (only my opinion). And now with Best Thing sounding similar... Yaaaay! :) *happytimes*

(Of course Bullet the Blue Sky was unbelievable, too. As much as I sometimes dislike Bono talking politics - it totally worked there... And the interview was fun too! Btw. did Bono loose weight or was it the lightning? :D).

So... let's wait for Songs of Experience. Bye!
 
I still regard NLOTH as the last real U2 record. They're a shell of what they have been, without Eno & Lanois.

I feel like Team NLOTH (of which I am also a part) gets together a few times per year on Interference and just annoys everyone. I love it when it happens. ;)
 
And "classic U2", at least classic U2 post War, owes a big part of its sound to Eno & Lanois.

Great point...very true!

I do, however, disagree with your characterisation that what Eno brought to that record (or any U2 record) was merely "bells & whistles". Eno, along with Daniel Lanois, was a full collaborator on NLOTH, and what he brings is a lot more than just just sonic tricks.

Also very true but in the end though I only see his contribution as bells and whistles because it made the songs too complicated and confused. NLOTH has so many different confusing sounds and directions all of which do it a great disservice.
 
Last edited:
How does Edge sound so good in the live version during the Middle 8?

Singing abilities aside, does anyone think they double tracked the live vocal? Or it just outstanding effects / EQ?

It almost sounds double tracked to me...

This is one of those songs where a non-croaky Bono would sound *a lot* better on. It really demands a cleaner vocal (like Edge's on Fallon).
 
No Line could have been an excellent album if they had stuck to the vision of Eno and Lanois.

Instead, they got in producers to water it down and produce extremely dull 'rawk' music (see that risible middle three tunes); this mindset was best epitomised by Breathe and it's a crying shame to hear that Brian Eno's ethereal version was neglected while the band re-recorded it in a desperate attempt to produce a rock anthem.

A real shame, because the first three tracks and a few of the more impressionistic and subdued final tracks are excellent and showed an album with much potential. Who knows, maybe many of the tracks from the Songs of Ascent album would have suited the album much better than the cringy dadrock of Stand Up Comedy and Get On Your Boots.

No Line is U2's problems in a nutshell; desperately attempting to be as accessible as possible, ending up writing really dull 'rawk' songs, thus compromising the raw talent and artistic potential of the band members themselves.

Subtlety goes a long way in U2's music, more than most people think, and when they omit that, they start to join the queue of MOR dullards like Coldplay and the appalling Keane.

I'd love to see them collaborate once more with Eno & Lanois who really do eke the best out of their talents.... and this time without compromising the album by bringing in MOR producers.

Big question is: do you think Eno & Lanois will ever renew their partnership with U2?
 
No Line could have been an excellent album if they had stuck to the vision of Eno and Lanois.

Instead, they got in producers to water it down and produce extremely dull 'rawk' music (see that risible middle three tunes); this mindset was best epitomised by Breathe and it's a crying shame to hear that Brian Eno's ethereal version was neglected while the band re-recorded it in a desperate attempt to produce a rock anthem.

A real shame, because the first three tracks and a few of the more impressionistic and subdued final tracks are excellent and showed an album with much potential. Who knows, maybe many of the tracks from the Songs of Ascent album would have suited the album much better than the cringy dadrock of Stand Up Comedy and Get On Your Boots.

No Line is U2's problems in a nutshell; desperately attempting to be as accessible as possible, ending up writing really dull 'rawk' songs, thus compromising the raw talent and artistic potential of the band members themselves.

Subtlety goes a long way in U2's music, more than most people think, and when they omit that, they start to join the queue of MOR dullards like Coldplay and the appalling Keane.

I'd love to see them collaborate once more with Eno & Lanois who really do eke the best out of their talents.... and this time without compromising the album by bringing in MOR producers.

Good post.

Big question is: do you think Eno & Lanois will ever renew their partnership with U2?

Why would they want to?
 
Am I correct in thinking that it was reported that they ruined their relationships with Eno & Lanois during NLOTH?
 
Eno will be 70 in May. It's likely that when U2 get around to recording again he'll be too old to want or be able to...or even be dead. :down:

We'd be lucky to get one more from that team. I really hope E&I is U2's last tour and they focus on recording (and not taking years to release an album!)
 
Last edited:
Am I correct in thinking that it was reported that they ruined their relationships with Eno & Lanois during NLOTH?

I heard something about that, but just rumours mostly.

In any event event, that's Eno, Lanois and McGuinness unceremoniously dumped since NLOTH. Almost half of what made this band work.

And for what? Bringing in a manager who regards them as just another big client, and a string of producers of the moment?

We'd be lucky to get one more from that team. I really hope E&I is U2's last tour and they focus on recording (and not taking years to release an album!)

Put the band back together for Songs of Ascent and call it a day! Nothing like going out on a high note!

giphy.gif
 
Last edited:
I heard something about that, but just rumours mostly.

In any event event, that's Eno, Lanois and McGuinness unceremoniously dumped since NLOTH. Almost half of what made this band work.

It was my understanding that it was McGuiness's choice to leave?

Never heard anything about a rift with Eno / Lanois. Are there any sources for this?
 
Last edited:
Both Eno & Lanois did remixes for the Joshua Tree reissue so maybe things were patched up. Eno was at the Berlin gig too...

Did Lanois throw shade at their commercial ambitions when talking about SOI?
 
Let's not be overly dramatic. McGuiness walked away, Eno did complain about songwriting credits for ATYCLB - not sure Lanois had a beef.

Even so, see above post. No way are they burning their Batman and Robin bridge.
 
Yeah, I think there might have been some shade thrown and a bit of tension revealed by both Eno and Lanois in various comments in the aftermath of NLOTH, but I doubt it was anything long term. Those guys are all adults and those relationships go back a long way. I'm sure there were bruised feeling but people get over that stuff.

It's my personal opinion that McG was nudged towards the door. I know the official line was that he wanted to retire, but I don't believe it for various reasons. I'm not saying he was fired, but I suspect U2 felt it was time for them to move on. I have nothing but my own intuition on this, which tells me he was nudged, so don't ask me for any links.

People are free to disagree and buy the official line, and that's fine.
 
SOI is a lot more experimental and risky than given credit for - despite some glossy production in parts. The last half is amazing. And then you add Lucifer's Hands and Crystal Ballroom and that's an incredible run of music.

For once in eons, U2 manages to sound like a younger band.

And more importantly, it's better than NLOTH.
 
So basically without eno and lanois,U2 are rubbish?������

No, they're not rubbish. They put out three solid records before those two showed up on the scene, and a few after.

But Eno and Lanois are a huge part of what made U2 a great, transcendent band. Delete Pop or SOI from U2's catalogue and...so what? Delete pretty much any one of records they collaborated with Brian and Danny on (excepting NLOTH) and U2's legacy, both musically and in terms of popularity, is lessened significantly.

And if Brian and Danny don't come on the scene with The Unforgettable Fire, U2 is the Simple Minds today.
 
Last edited:
No, they're not rubbish. They put out three solid records before those two showed up on the scene, and a few after.

But Eno and Lanois are a huge part of what made U2 a great, transcendent band. Delete Pop or SOI from U2's catalogue and...so what? Delete pretty much any one of records they collaborated with Brian and Danny on and U2's legacy, both musically and in terms of popularity, is lessened significantly.

And if Brian and Danny don't come on the scene with The Unforgettable Fire, U2 is the Simple Minds today.
Yet was it eno that wanted to delete streets?! There is no denying the work they have done together,but I wouldn't credit eno and lanois with all their succes.
 
Yet was it eno that wanted to delete streets?! There is no denying the work they have done together,but I wouldn't credit eno and lanois with all their succes.

Of course they don't get all the credit. I don't think anyone would ever suggest that. Obviously there's no TUF, or JT, or AB without U2. That goes without saying. But we wouldn't have those records without Eno or Lanois either.

It was a beautiful collaboration that produced some of the greatest rock music, ever. And they all needed each other to make that music. Take away Eno and Lanois, and U2 clearly isn't the same band...and I'd say no where near as good. They certainly never get anywhere near the heights the achieved without those two.
 
Brian Eno in particular is to U2 what George Martin was to The Beatles.

A sounding board for great ideas and an expert intuition in pulling the band in a direction that never seemed capable before.

They just fit together like hand in glove - a marriage of convenience between the Celtic mysticism and deep spirituality of U2's music with Eno's abstract sonic landscapes conjures up a vivid imaginative world unlike anything other in music for me personally. Heartfelt with a range of emotions, that ability to also take your mind to a physical environment - imaginary or real - is tantamount to the success of U2.

It really depends on who the producer is - Bono and The Edge in particular have proven themselves as visionary songwriters willing to take their music to new levels, and it often required a producer with the same artistic vision and creativity to achieve those ideals. That happened without Brian Eno - Mofo (along with a few handful of tunes from Pop) for me is a monumental piece of work that achieved artistic gratification similar to their work with Eno, albeit very different sonically.

So it is a real disappointment when U2 opt for producers who just simply are not artists. The nadir of this is hiring Ryan Tedder, a producer and songwriter so artistically bankrupt it is cringeworthy and painful to see such a creatively expansive band hire him and take themselves down to a level that is unbefitting of the ethereal qualities that made this band one of the greatest ever.

And while they do try to incorporate some of the sonic tricks into these songs worked on by dull MOR producers like Tedder, it feels more or less just like attractive paraphernalia in an attempt to comfort long time fans that this is still the same band. But it's not - it doesn't have that Eno inspired organic nature to it where tiny little sonic fragments thread into the fabric of a sonic landscape and evoke a feeling. It's all too mechanical, rectilinear and tacked on, rather than the culmination of almost disparate sounds into an aural frame to create one whole piece of music ala A Sort Of Homecoming.

Subtlety is what separates U2 from being merely a big band to being a great one. While their music is typically stereotyped as euphoric, these moments of euphoria were embedded in a subdued and melancholy context which made those moments cathartic and all the more effective. And that concerns the sonic, melodic and lyrical aspects of the band where everything seems so much more blunt and hamfisted. Bono does not need to sing big choruses to be effective, but these days he thinks he has to - it doesn't work, because the subtlety in the music and the melody is not there anymore. It all appears rather crass as a result, and it just seems that they've forgotten what made them great.

Which is why the time would be right for Brian Eno to jump back on this wayward ship. I believe U2 can still make brilliant music, but I'd like to hear them reign it in a bit musically, melodically and lyrically, and offer a more introspective and contemplative approach next time around (after Songs of Experience because let's be honest, they're taking the sledgehammer approach to songwriting with this one).

I'll leave it on an optimistic note to show you that I think the genius of the band is still there. The Little Things That Give You Away is my favourite of their new songs so far, primarily because there is an element of beautiful restraint, by which I mean the pre-chorus which threads the song nicely.

'Oh la la, I'm not a ghost now/I can see you/You need to see me' offers a subdued melody with a quiet desperation attached to its lyrics, providing us with a sense of insecurity and inner turmoil that slowly eats away at the song's protagonist (autobiographical I presume). It's not obvious on first listen, but it's quietly devastating when you finally acknowledge it. And because of this, the chorus is all the better for it - a typical wide reaching Bono chorus if ever there was one, but there's meaning and tenderness attached to it once again, just like they did way back when. That pre-chorus is a beautiful moment that proves to me that it is indeed 'the little things' that may not be so noticeable on first listen but emphatically strikes at the heart of what makes U2 such a great band for me.
 
Last edited:
I know you're not fishing for compliments, but lovely (and very well written) post MattD....I especially like this...

They just fit together like hand in glove - a marriage of convenience between the Celtic mysticism and deep spirituality of U2's music with Eno's abstract sonic landscapes conjures up a vivid imaginative world unlike anything other in music for me personally. Heartfelt with a range of emotions, that ability to also take your mind to a physical environment - imaginary or real - is tantamount to the success of U2.

Welcome to the board!
 
Brian Eno in particular is to U2 what George Martin was to The Beatles.

A sounding board for great ideas and an expert intuition in pulling the band in a direction that never seemed capable before.

They just fit together like hand in glove - a marriage of convenience between the Celtic mysticism and deep spirituality of U2's music with Eno's abstract sonic landscapes conjures up a vivid imaginative world unlike anything other in music for me personally. Heartfelt with a range of emotions, that ability to also take your mind to a physical environment - imaginary or real - is tantamount to the success of U2.

It really depends on who the producer is - Bono and The Edge in particular have proven themselves as visionary songwriters willing to take their music to new levels, and it often required a producer with the same artistic vision and creativity to achieve those ideals. That happened without Brian Eno - Mofo (along with a few handful of tunes from Pop) for me is a monumental piece of work that achieved artistic gratification similar to their work with Eno, albeit very different sonically.

So it is a real disappointment when U2 opt for producers who just simply are not artists. The nadir of this is hiring Ryan Tedder, a producer and songwriter so artistically bankrupt it is cringeworthy and painful to see such a creatively expansive band hire him and take themselves down to a level that is unbefitting of the ethereal qualities that made this band one of the greatest ever.

And while they do try to incorporate some of the sonic tricks into these songs worked on by dull MOR producers like Tedder, it feels more or less just like attractive paraphernalia in an attempt to comfort long time fans that this is still the same band. But it's not - it doesn't have that Eno inspired organic nature to it where tiny little sonic fragments thread into the fabric of a sonic landscape and evoke a feeling. It's all too mechanical, rectilinear and tacked on, rather than the culmination of almost disparate sounds into an aural frame to create one whole piece of music ala A Sort Of Homecoming.

Subtlety is what separates U2 from being merely a big band to being a great one. While their music is typically stereotyped as euphoric, these moments of euphoria were embedded in a subdued and melancholy context which made those moments cathartic and all the more effective. And that concerns the sonic, melodic and lyrical aspects of the band where everything seems so much more blunt and hamfisted. Bono does not need to sing big choruses to be effective, but these days he thinks he has to - it doesn't work, because the subtlety in the music and the melody is not there anymore. It all appears rather crass as a result, and it just seems that they've forgotten what made them great.

Which is why the time would be right for Brian Eno to jump back on this wayward ship. I believe U2 can still make brilliant music, but I'd like to hear them reign it in a bit musically, melodically and lyrically, and offer a more introspective and contemplative approach next time around (after Songs of Experience because let's be honest, they're taking the sledgehammer approach to songwriting with this one).

I'll leave it on an optimistic note to show you that I think the genius of the band is still there. The Little Things That Give You Away is my favourite of their new songs so far, primarily because there is an element of beautiful restraint, by which I mean the pre-chorus which threads the song nicely.

'Oh la la, I'm not a ghost now/I can see you/You need to see me' offers a subdued melody with a quiet desperation attached to its lyrics, providing us with a sense of insecurity and inner turmoil that slowly eats away at the song's protagonist (autobiographical I presume). It's not obvious on first listen, but it's quietly devastating when you finally acknowledge it. And because of this, the chorus is all the better for it - a typical wide reaching Bono chorus if ever there was one, but there's meaning and tenderness attached to it once again, just like they did way back when. That pre-chorus is a beautiful moment that proves to me that it is indeed 'the little things' that may not be so noticeable on first listen but emphatically strikes at the heart of what makes U2 such a great band for me.

You should be getting paid for your writing ;]

So what do you think? Eno and Lanois for SOA?

Or is that hoping for too much? Now that the rule of threes may be broken, who knows what happens after SOE...

BTW, I rate SOI pretty highly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom