Zooropa couldve been U2's best with one more track

[U2girl]

It wouldn't be their best album, but not putting that song on Zooropa is their biggest album tracklisting mistake.

 

[Blue Room]

Wow! I completely respect your opinion because we all have such differing views and none are "more right" than others.

BUT, you and I could not have more differeing opinons on this if we tried! I'm ALL ABOUT Zooropa and POP is, without a doubt, my LEAST favorite U2 release.

To each his own, I'm just chuckling at how disparate our views are. hehehehehehe

I think you sort of misunderstand my view point. I dont think Zooropa is a bad album. In comparison to other U2 albums though its one of my least favorites as an overall album (w/October being my least favorite). It sounds like it was slapped together to me. Which basically it was as they didnt spend the time on it they would have liked (the same is true for the October album). Edge has mentioned that before. Some people think its great for that reason. But thats not what I'm into U2 for. I like the albums they spend alot of time on and I think they are one of the greatest live bands ever. Those are things I like about their work. Joshua Tree, Achtung Baby, ATYCLB, those are my favorite U2 albums (the verdict is still out on Bomb for me, I still like it alot but need to see if I'm still listening to it in a few years). They spent alot of time on them and I think it shows. Spontaneity is not something I think U2 does all that well.

Couple of things would have made Zooropa better for me. I'm know alot will disagree but I think they should have used the version of the Wanderer with Bono on vocals. They could have put the version with Johnny Cash as a B side or maybe even a bonus track. But I think Bonos version should have been on the album. I also think Lose Control should have made it. It wasnt a rocker but it was supposedly better than Some Days which is OK but complete "filler" to me.

Each there own, like I said, I dont hate the album. But it rarely sees rotation in my CD player. When I make a compilation of U2 songs though Zooropa and Dirty Day make the cut alot of the time. I think those songs stack up with anything they have done. I'm just talking overall album.

 

[cobl04]

Each there own, like I said, I dont hate the album. But it rarely sees rotation in my CD player.

I'm like that with War.

 

[mysterious_jen]

i think zooropa is brilliant ( not that my opinon counts as a newbie but here it is anyway ) possibly could have dropped the wanderer, but i dont think HMTMKMKM would have quite fit with the album at the time. mabey my reasons for loving zooropa are sentimental more than anything, it was the first u2 album i owned on cd, before i even had a cd player and it accompained me through some truly crappy teenage years, and fueld my outrageous love for u2 . stay brings me to tears, daddy's gonna pay and dirty day for me are just awesome angst personafied..
im rambling, anyway this discussion has brought Zooropa back out of its torn scuffed stickytaped up carboard cover and back to high rotation for me!

 

[Screwtape2]

i think zooropa is brilliant ( not that my opinon counts as a newbie but here it is anyway )

Everybody's opinion counts no matter who many posts you have or how long you have been here. At least you aren't coming here asking for Window In The Skies.

 

[Mogi]

I think that putting Lady with the Spinning Head at the second spot and moving or even deleting Babyface would have turned this into a classic.
I just think Babyface is like a big zit at the second spot. Yes, it´s thematically fitting, but it´s just not that good of a song.
I think "Lady" would have given Zooropa a massive boost.

 

[SpaceBoy]

I think "Lady" would have given Zooropa a massive boost.

But it wouldn't of really made sense seeing as it's basically The Fly (verse drums and bass are identical) with touches of Ultraviolet.

 

[Screwtape2]

I think that putting Lady with the Spinning Head at the second spot and moving or even deleting Babyface would have turned this into a classic.
I just think Babyface is like a big zit at the second spot. Yes, it´s thematically fitting, but it´s just not that good of a song.
I think "Lady" would have given Zooropa a massive boost.

Babyface HAS to be on Zooropa for the album to work. No other song could connect Zooropa and Numb. Putting Lady after Zooropa would be a disaster. You can't take an expansive, melodic song like Zooropa and follow it with a faster paced rocker. More importantly, Babyface is a great song. Babyface, Stay and Dirty Day are the backbone of the album if you take one out, the album will lose cohesion.

 

[Blue Room]

Babyface HAS to be on Zooropa for the album to work. No other song could connect Zooropa and Numb. Putting Lady after Zooropa would be a disaster. You can't take an expansive, melodic song like Zooropa and follow it with a faster paced rocker. More importantly, Babyface is a great song. Babyface, Stay and Dirty Day are the backbone of the album if you take one out, the album will lose cohesion.

Except the bands goal at the time was that it didnt have any cohesion. Other than no guitar. So I guess they failed if you think it was cohesive. Like I said before, it sounds disjointed to me, which is actually what U2 were trying to do to a certain extent. I just didnt care for it.

Regarding the Lady w/The Spnning Head being mentioned previously. Why would they put a B side that was already released on a new album anyway? Lady wouldnt fit on it anymore than HMTMKMKM would have. Difference being HMTMKMKM had not already been released. It would be like them putting "Are You Gonna Wait Forever" on the next album. Good Lord can you imagine the bitching about that??

 

[chocky]

Personally I think the mistakes on Zooropa are Johnny Cash and Babble.

After 14 years, the first 2 minutes of Zooropa (officially called Babble and it really is...babble) is just irritating now. Maybe if it were shorter?

If I wanted Johnny Cash I'd buy his albums. Even though the song was written with Cash in mind, the U2 performance from 2004 showed us Bono & Edge could have done an excellent job with the vocals.

Change those 2 things and Zooropa would be excellent. No need for HMTMKMKM.

 

[dietcokeofevil]

I love the whole Zooropa song including the babble. I love it, love it, love it.

 

[BVS]

Personally I think the mistakes on Zooropa are Johnny Cash and Babble.

After 14 years, the first 2 minutes of Zooropa (officially called Babble and it really is...babble) is just irritating now. Maybe if it were shorter?

If I wanted Johnny Cash I'd buy his albums. Even though the song was written with Cash in mind, the U2 performance from 2004 showed us Bono & Edge could have done an excellent job with the vocals.

Change those 2 things and Zooropa would be excellent. No need for HMTMKMKM.

I agree with the babble. I always fast forward through that part. What an amazing song, I just wish it didn't have such a boring intro...

As far as Johnny Cash, one of the boldest and amazing moves made by U2. Absolutely fucking amazing...

Although I have to admit, The Wanderer with Bono vocal(rumor has it one of his best vocal tracks) I can't wait to hear someday on a box set or something...





As far as Babyface, I can see why people hate it, but I think it's one of the most misunderstood tracks U2 has made...

 

[t8thgr8]

well for those who dont like babyface, its about porn so that may help out if you think its too soft and corny. perfect complement to even better than the real thing.

welcome to chaos, mysterious jen. your opinion is valued like any other. glad i could be of assistance on sending you back to zooropa. the wanderer has great lyrics on it and while it shouldnt be dropped it couldve definitely used bono on it. but then it mightve sounded like the joshua tree on acid so that might be why they went to left field with johnny.

the babble at the beginning of zooropa is crucial. you may just need the proper system to hear it all. its not necessary but it certaintly isnt the same without it, i had to cut out the first minute on a mix cd one time via itunes and it was welcomed back in full format.

babyface does kind of suck in the 2 spot. zooropa numb lemon and stay are so strong, its a shame that song is where it is. maybe hold me thrill me couldve taken the 2 spot. best first half of any u2 cd?

zooropa
hold me thrill me
numb
lemon
stay

hmmm im gonna have to say

lastly, does anyone hear the sporatic static on zooropa in the background when its up loud? like youre watching a tv. that would explain the idea of the record being so random, like tv channels.

 

[david]

well for those who dont like babyface, its about porn so that may help out if you think its too soft and corny. perfect complement to even better than the real thing.

Hrm. I don't think it's about porn. At least not totally.

I think it's a song about beauty and infatuation with it.

 

[t8thgr8]

listening......


nope, im pretty sure its about watching porn via sattelite services, listen to the words.

and an interesting side note, the guitar sounds a little like thrill me at a slower tempo.

whoever said theres no guitars on this album need to listen to it again.

woop there they go again to kick off numb. i must be taking crazy pills

 

[t8thgr8]

less about beauty and infatuation and more about seclusion and delusion.

 

[mysterious_jen]

i thought baby face was about a stalker type character????

as for the babble at the start i like it , i find for me its sets the album up nicely and sounds great on a good sound system or through headphones.
actually the whole album is reallly cool and surreal through headphones.
except for that damm beeping at the end which would wake me up with a heart attack if i went to sleep listening to the album.

 

[t8thgr8]

hmm nocturnal like me....

edit* nevermind youre in australia

i like to think of the siren as a reference to zoo tv going off the air, like that thing on tv with the color bars and that noise or the emergency broadcast system type of thing. they say its a dj siren.

 

[t8thgr8]

damn you just posted that

 

[intedomine]

Zooropa = U2's best song of the 90's, just ahead of Discotheque.

That said, the Zooropa album really is just a more half-arsed, poor-man's Achtung Baby. Not necessarily a bad album, but just not quite in the same class as Achtung Baby.

Nothing at all wrong with preferring Zooropa over Achtung Baby though...

 

[Saracene]

I don't think HMTMKMKM would have fitted on Zooropa. The album itself is hit and miss as far as I'm concerned; the best moments easily rank with U2's best but there's just too much boring mediocre filler for my liking. Dirty Day is absolutely amazing live though.

 

[Blue Room]

listening......

whoever said theres no guitars on this album need to listen to it again.

Uh, that would be Edge that said that. There are alot of guitars on the album, it just doesnt sound like the traditional guitar for the most part. That is why they have said and fans say its not a guitar driven album.

It really is interesting though reading through the posts. Everyone can have such huge differences in opinion on U2's work. Zooropa is one of the few highlights on the Zooropa album to me and some list it as the weak part. It just shows how many different tastes and styles U2 can appeal to. One of the reasons they have such a massive following.

Those that dont like the babble, just get the Radio Prom edit of the song and burn a new disc with that version. Thats what I did back in the day when I was listening to this album often (IE 1993/94).

 

[LemonMelon]

That said, the Zooropa album really is just a more half-arsed, poor-man's Achtung Baby.

Please elaborate on this.

 

[Bug]

That said, the Zooropa album really is just a more half-arsed, poor-man's Achtung Baby.

lol, wut?

 

[intedomine]

I'm just saying, that's how Zooropa will be regarded, and probably rightfully so.

The time spent recording and mixing Zooropa is probably significantly less than the time spent in the studio with Achtung Baby.

A lot of the songs from Zooropa were probably first dreamt up during the Achtung Baby sessions. They would have been unfinished pieces, not quite good enough to appear on Achtung Baby, but were later re-recorded and used for the mid-tour release that was Zooropa.

And 90% of folk out there who have heard both albums, will prefer Achtung Baby over Zooropa.


There's nothing wrong with preferring Zooropa over Achtung Baby, but it will never be held in the same regard as Achtung Baby, and to me that is a perfectly understandable thing.

Achtung Baby will be seen to epitomise what 90s U2 is all about.
Achtung Baby is the classic.

Achtung Baby is the mother's golden child, Zooropa is just the forgotten dark horse of the family, the middle-child, if you will, forever overshadowed by it's older sibling.

Pop is that attention seeking mischievious youngest sibling, who everyone's a little unsure about.

 

[catlhere]

Marcia Marcia Marcia!

I think Zooropa rocks my socks! It doesn't need anything. Well actually it could use something else besides Babyface, which imo is one of the worst pieces of music U2 has ever unfortunately stumbled upon. Other than that, I love the album just the way it is.

Oh and that 2 minute intro is bitchin'

 

[LemonMelon]

intedomine, I can respect your opinion, but you based it all on what other people will think about both records, not what the two records actually sound like. If Zooropa sounded anything at all like AB, I could agree with you, but since they're entirely different records attempting to achieve two completely different goals, I don't think a comparison is justified. (Especially to call Zooropa a half-arsed, poor-man's AB...as if U2 were trying to make the same record twice.)

The rest of this post is 100% opinion, with no actual fact

AB isn't a classic. It's not good enough to be a classic; it has too many flaws, and not enough good songs. It was groundbreaking, sure, but it's a merely great record overall (B+, 8/10). Great records are fairly common. Joshua Tree is a classic because it is 1) A masterpiece and 2) has stood the test of time. I'm not sure if Zooropa is a classic, but AB sure isn't, IMO.

 

[FullonEdge2]

intedomine, I can respect your opinion, but you based it all on what other people will think about both records, not what the two records actually sound like. If Zooropa sounded anything at all like AB, I could agree with you, but since they're entirely different records attempting to achieve two completely different goals, I don't think a comparison is justified. (Especially to call Zooropa a half-arsed, poor-man's AB...as if U2 were trying to make the same record twice.)

The rest of this post is 100% opinion, with no actual fact

AB isn't a classic. It's not good enough to be a classic; it has too many flaws, and not enough good songs. It was groundbreaking, sure, but it's a merely great record overall (B+, 8/10). Great records are fairly common. Joshua Tree is a classic because it is 1) A masterpiece and 2) has stood the test of time. I'm not sure if Zooropa is a classic, but AB sure isn't, IMO.

LemonMelon:

I think many people here, myself included, would suggest that Achtung Baby is more densely concentrated with great songs than any other U2 record. For the record, this is Bono's opinion as well.

 

[intedomine]

intedomine, I can respect your opinion, but you based it all on what other people will think about both records, not what the two records actually sound like. If Zooropa sounded anything at all like AB, I could agree with you, but since they're entirely different records attempting to achieve two completely different goals, I don't think a comparison is justified. (Especially to call Zooropa a half-arsed, poor-man's AB...as if U2 were trying to make the same record twice.)

Well, for me, Zooropa sounds like is a continuation and extension of the themes and the sounds that were explored on Achtung Baby, just slightly wierder and left-field (Daddy's Gonna Pay, the DJ siren, Numb).

In fact, I can't listen to Zooropa (the song - my 3rd favourite U2 song overall), without thinking of it as the most "Achtung Baby sounding song" U2 have ever written. It sounds more "Achtung Baby" than any of the songs from Achtung Baby. A remarkable thing seeing as the song doesn't even appear on that album.

Achtung Baby IS the revolution. Zooropa is just what comes next, and I can only listen to these albums in that way.

But, again, this is just my personal view. Others might agree, many may disagree, but I am in no way attacking the lovely album that is Zooropa.

I just feel it is important to consider why Achtung Baby is more often attributed "classic" or "5 star" status, whereas Zooropa is not. I feel it lies in the popular regard for Zooropa being "poor-man" and "half-arsed (not to say that it was, but certain factors just make it seem that way and encourage people to think of it that way).

All of the above is 100% opinion in a sense, in that these views ARE based primarily on what the album sounds like. It's how I AM hearing the album, and I'm just bringing in "what people think" as a means of raising further questions as to Zooropa's status as "inferior" to it's predecessor.

Indeed, what does Zooropa lack, that Achting Baby has?


I'm curious as to what you believe to be the flaws of Achtung Baby?

 

[Earnie Shavers]

The major change on Achtung is the influence of electronica on rock that was pretty common at the time. Infusing a sort of dance beat into your rhythm section. That's where the carry over is into Zooropa, further delving into that territory, where the electronica influence is starting to take over further both sonically and structurally. Zoo Station vs Bottoms in one way, Zoo Station vs Zooropa in another (I have no idea why you think Zooropa the track is an 'Achtung' track).
I actually think it's almost a crime how closely linked Zooropa is to Achtung. It's another major swing IMO.