Nick66
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
If you're measuring quality with your criteria, then it's hard to argue the point. The problem with your "analysis" is that not everyone measures albums the same way. Personally, I liked a lot of NLOTH, still do. 5 years ago I was parading around this place talking about how brilliant Fez - Being Porn was, but at the same time, I was furious that the band actually delayed the album to "finish" SUC, which is arguably the worst song in U2's catalog.
SOI represents all I've wanted since Pop, which is a strong album front to back.
Also, I'd argue that Iris is as great of a high as MOS, and Reach Around is as good of a song that they've released since the 90's.
So yeah, it's all down to opinions. Not analysis, not mathematical equations. Opinions.
Well, of course it's just opinion...what else would it be? That goes without saying.
I will say that I think the notion that SOI is a more consistent listening experience vs. NLOTH has pretty much moved past mere opinion to conventional wisdom. I don't think there are many people who'd disagree with that. It is a more consistent record throughout. There's not a "bad" son on SOI as far as I'm concerned, and nothing nearly as bad as the worst of NLOTH...but nothing as good as the best of it either, in my judgement.
So yeah, it's just my opinion that those high points in NLOTH are so strong that, for me, it makes it a better record. I'm just not finding I'm going back to SOI that much, and feel somewhat detached from the music. And while I agree that Iris is great (I think it's the strongest song on the record), I don't think it holds a candle to MOS, which I regard as their best song since Streets.
I still rank SOI as a solid seven, though I think it's only their third best record since Pop. Perhaps my opinion will change once I hear the songs in concert, which after all is where U2 songs really come alive (and I thought the NLOTH songs sounded great live).