There's a lot of mistakes in there. Stephen Dalton and Bud Scoppa, or whatever his name is, made me quite cross when I read what they had written on Bomb and No Line. First of all didn't ATYCLB sell 11 million not 12. HTDAAB sold 10 million not 9. So no, the difference in sales is not hugely different especcially when you consider that even in 2004 CD sales were decreasing (there was an article in the Rolling Stone in the same edition when U2 appeared in it). Maybe Bomb could've been considered to be more successful than ATYCLB because it won Grammies, and what luke warm reception did it receive? The idiot called Jon Earls who obviously dislikes the band fullstop, and the odd random guy on the internet. But that album received great reviews you silly plank Mr Dalton. Maybe he's on here because this is where you find people who bleat that music should be innovative. I'm not sure Oasis fans concern themselves with the same worries, since their music changed over the past 15 years. I don't know hay that he put that Ipod commercial was a sellout even when Larry said on the following page that they didn't get paid for doing the commercial. Don't they have an editor? Other bands followed suite by allowing their music to be on Itunes but because U2 were the first to allow all their songs to be available on there they get criticized. Pop sold 9 million not 7.
Plus putting many layers in songs serves to disguise bad voices or crap singing, so it is a negative not a possitive. It's better for songs to be stripped back.
I only paid £6 for it because I liked the pictures in it. I'm now begining to regret this discision as a waste of money