Zooropa's sound quality compared with Achtung and Pop

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

Zoots

Blue Crack Supplier
Joined
Aug 22, 2002
Messages
36,802
Location
the great beyond
Why is the sound quality on Zooropa so bad when compared to say, Achtung or Pop??? Will it go away with remastering? Or is this a production issue?

I think part of the reason I don't enjoy Zooropa as much as the other 2 albums is because of the sound quality. Of course, I more than admire the experimentation on that CD but songs like the title track, The First Time, Dirty Day etc. could've been improved to sound a lot better on the album, no? Yet another reason why I voted Zoo Station in that thread comparing it with Zooropa.
 
Nothing wrong with the sound quality for me , maybe its just the way they are supposed to be.
 
I'm not totally sure if it's the sound quality or simply the mastering (mixing?) volume... The whole CD is like the opposite of HTDAAB. The Bomb is too loud and Zooropa is too low. :huh:
 
Zooropa sounds great. Pop and HTDAAB are U2's two most poorly produced albums.
 
This is a good topic, and IMO almost every U2 album suffers terribly in this area. The albums either sound flat, or muddy, or they're mixed way too "hot" (HTDAAB). The worst are IMO UF, Zooropa, and HTDAAB...with the older albums there's some improvement if you get the MFSL releases (War, UF, JT).

We all know how great U2 are live, I'd love to see them just play the next album in the studio & record it live. I know this will never happen...does any band do this? But think of how great it would be...plus they'd have a better idea of how to play the new songs live, so less screwing up on the early tour dates.
 
But anyway, Zoots, I think that the problem must be with your disc specifically...:wink:
Well, I never found anything wrong with Zooropa sound quality. When I say it, I'm thinking mostly about the first 7 tracks, for instance...
 
I think Zooropa's sound blows Achtung out of the water. There's a lot more deep throbbing bass, and the instruments sound clear. Achtung sounds almost messy by comparison, although I still love it. It just needs to be remastered. For early 90's tho, Zooropa sounds almost perfect.
 
I always thought sound quality wise, Zooropa was one of the best things U2 has put out :huh: maybe I should go listen to it again...
 
Yeah, I agree with the crowd who think Zooropa isn't so bad. Sure, it isn't the best mixing on the face of the planet, but I think it slays Achtung (UTEOTW and So Cruel being especially bad) and Pop. Then again, Dirty Day sounds bad on all levels, performance and mixing ...

The title track of Zooropa sounds wonderful though, they did a good job on that.
 
Man some of the mixes that come out of the U2 studio are pretty terrible. COBL, Streets, UTEOTW, - jesus, COBL always gets me. It's like a guitar playing over a washing machine!:huh:
 
I agree with those who like the mixing--Zooropa has U2's best mixing, IMO, along with JT. Achtung has the worst, it's actually difficult for me to listen to because I KNOW how much better it could (and should) sound. :mad:
 
I agree with the thread starter although I don't agree AB is that much better. It's why I prefer the numb remix to the album version.
 
It's a pretty funny thing, you know, the most underrated U2 albums ever - Zooropa, Passengers and Pop - have arguably the best sound :drool: :drool:

Acthung Baby sounds ok, but Joshua Tree sounds TERRIBLE :ohmy: just check adam's bass on songs like WTSHNN, or Larry's drums. Whole lack of depth, definition and brightness. Cymbals sounds unforgivably bad, really. Both Zooropa and Pop has the best bass sound and excellent drumming sound. Also Edge's guitars sound simply out of this world !!!!

On the earlier albums you'll find even more problems with sound, specially on War :( and the problem with HTDAAB is that (just talking about sound quality ... :wink: I don't have to talk about other problems with the album) it sound like if it would have been mixed by a DJ who just want to MAKE IT LOUD at any cost :|
ZERO Dynamics, ZERO colors, just LOUD volume all the time
 
Zooropa sound quality = :drool:


It's one of the best sounding U2 albums, better than AB, and POP

Best Deep Bass

Awesome clear Bono's Voice

The textures feels so vivid and 3d , you almost can touch the music.

Overall , Great Sound , if you dont't like the album, don't dismiss the sound quality.
 
Zooropa's sound quality is bad compared to ACHTUNG BABY????? You must be joking. :huh:

Originally posted by Aygo

it was intentional to sound that way...

So...Achtung Baby sounds like crap on purpose now? :|

Zooropa is one of U2's best-produced albums, hands down.
 
Last edited:
Achtung Baby and Pop, strength of songs notwithstanding, are clusterfucks. Thank you, Flood!

God, he's worthless.
 
AB and Zooropa sound good, their best sounding albums, followed closely by RaH and JT.

Pop doesn't.
 
Everyone who has bashed me for saying the sound quality is bad, read this pls.

Zootlesque said:
I'm not totally sure if it's the sound quality or simply the mastering (mixing?) volume... The whole CD is like the opposite of HTDAAB. The Bomb is too loud and Zooropa is too low. :huh:
 
The Disciple said:
Good overall mix, but the sound IS low on some tracks.

Then pump up the volume. Zooropa sounds amazing at louder volume. This is an album you want to turn the volume up (instead of down like with HTDAAB).

:drool:
 
Back
Top Bottom