Steve Averill Q & A - 2 seperate Albums and re-issue of the complete backcatalogue?

[Earnie Shavers]

Those comments, both yours and Irvines, are about the mixing and production though, not the songs themselves. You can always hear what they're attempting, but it's too often drowned out by what has been fucked up at the, I assume, very rushed mixing stage. Velvet Dress, IMO, is gorgeous in every way. The right idea, the right structure, probably the right execution (ie I think every note is in it's right place, the bass early on is nice, then when it drops out and Edge takes over it is absolutely sublime etc), but then it has this really awful muddy production that completely sinks the song unless you are listening to it through really high quality headphones. Just play it on the stereo and it's virtually, well, nothing.

I also love the woosh.

[U2girl]

Originally posted by Irvine511




really? i always took it slightly differently. i thought the Pop-worshippers believe the album to be brilliant and daring and thrilling and wildly experimental and devil-may-care, when in reality it is just what you say it is -- a middle-ground rock album with some shiny beats. in retrospect, is the most bandwagon-jumping of all U2 albums, and while there's loads of interesting stuff to listen to, and some great songs, as well as some heavy themes, it's just not very successful at pulling off what it wants to accomplish.

if people love the songs, that's great, i won't argue. but if people love it because it's "daring" and "brave," well, i don't really think it is all that much.

Exactly.

[rihannsu]

Originally posted by Earnie Shavers
Those comments, both yours and Irvines, are about the mixing and production though, not the songs themselves. You can always hear what they're attempting, but it's too often drowned out by what has been fucked up at the, I assume, very rushed mixing stage. Velvet Dress, IMO, is gorgeous in every way. The right idea, the right structure, probably the right execution (ie I think every note is in it's right place, the bass early on is nice, then when it drops out and Edge takes over it is absolutely sublime etc), but then it has this really awful muddy production that completely sinks the song unless you are listening to it through really high quality headphones. Just play it on the stereo and it's virtually, well, nothing.

I also love the woosh.

But the way U2 writes you really cannot separate mixing/production stage from songwriting. They don't write songs then mix them. The mix is as much a part of the creative process for them as the playing of their instruments. They use mixes as inspiration for the continued development of the songs. For U2 the songwriting process doesn't end until the cd is mastered. On Pop they talked about how they were redoing backing vocals in the mastering suite. As Adam puts it a U2 record isn't finished until it is in the store. On the 90's albums especially the mix and production aspects were as important to the songs as any other part. Often the mix elements that people complain about are an important contributor to the mood or atmosphere of the songs. When you take those things away the songs become something else, the mood changes, and sometimes that can be good but also sometimes you loose something there.

Dana