Rate the Song: All Because Of You

[digitize]

Hello, hello… today we move onto voting for the first half of How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb.

Please rate All Because of You on a scale from 0 to 10, using whatever criteria you feel allows you to best evaluate the song as a whole. I will not set criteria for people to based on, but if you feel like your best evaluation of the merits of a song comes from voting only based on, say, the studio version, go right ahead and vote that way. Full information on the Rate The Song series may be found in this thread.

Have fun! This poll will close in 96 hours.

 

[gvox]

Solid track, if a bit rock cliche (whatever that means). Love the solo.

 

[Nick66]

Once again, this is what U2 on cruise control sounds like.

It's not bad, but it's entirely U2 by the numbers and would be instantly forgettable except for the memorable (and confessional) "I like the sound of my own voice" line. And it's impossible to completely dislike a song with "intellectual tortoise" in it.

5.

 

[mikal]

3 but if we were rating the alternate version from the ITunes package, i'd give it a 5.

 

[trevgreg]

Terrific solo. Otherwise, it's dropped off for me a bit than in recent years. 6.

 

[Galeongirl]

MY EARS!!


God, this has to be the worst production for a U2 song ever. It gets major minus points for being unlistenable through headphones.

I like the song itself though, nice rocky tune. And seeing Bono flail with that tambourine live = priceless.

 

[lemonfly]

Ugh. Dad rock by the numbers. Look up the word "filler" in the dictionary and you're sure to find this song being cited. 3

 

[LadySpinHead]

5. Pretty generic, but not entirely bad. I do hate it when it comes on my iPod on shuffle, though, especially after something like Mothers of the Disappeared. Ouch.

 

[digitize]

This song has to have the worst mastering of any U2 song ever.

 

[Nick66]

This song has to have the worst mastering of any U2 song ever.

Isn't that the truth. The whole record in fact suffers from terrible compression…to the point that it's kind of fatiguing to listen to the album from start to finish. The thing is just brick walled within an inch of its life and way too loud. U2 albums, especially their later ones, are typically mastered very well, but Bomb probably the one post-R&H record that is in desperate need of a remaster.

 

[digitize]

Isn't that the truth. The whole record in fact suffers from terrible compression…to the point that it's kind of fatiguing to listen to the thing from start to finish. The thing is just brick walled within an inch of its life and way too loud. U2 albums, especially their later ones, are typically mastered very well, but Bomb probably the one post-R&H record that is in desperate need of a remaster.

Bomb is pretty much unlistenable to me because of the mastering. ABOY is the worst - the loud guitar shriek as the beginning is annoying, but what's more annoying is that the volume never actually goes down from that. And not only is the compression there, I can easily hear the distortion it causes when I use halfway decent listening equipment. Even Cobble, which I love and I think has decent production overall, I pretty much only listen to live versions of because how how badly the studio version is mastered. Bomb truly needs to be remastered... for quietness.

 

[OpenG180]

Bomb is pretty much unlistenable to me because of the mastering. ABOY is the worst - the loud guitar shriek as the beginning is annoying, but what's more annoying is that the volume never actually goes down from that. And not only is the compression there, I can easily hear the distortion it causes when I use halfway decent listening equipment. Even Cobble, which I love and I think has decent production overall, I pretty much only listen to live versions of because how how badly the studio version is mastered. Bomb truly needs to be remastered... for quietness.

There are distortions everywhere.. Miracle Drug, Crumbs.. It's a bit better on the vinyl tho.

 

[digitize]

There are distortions everywhere.. Miracle Drug, Crumbs.. It's a bit better on the vinyl tho.

I wonder if a vinyl rip is out there... that might be nice.

 

[Nick66]

I wonder if a vinyl rip is out there... that might be nice.

True. It might be a better master, but it won't make the songs any better.

I pretty much only listen to the live versions also (but I pretty much only listen to the live versions of most U2 these days).

 

[OpenG180]

True. It might be a better master, but it won't make the songs any better.

I pretty much only listen to the live versions also (but I pretty much only listen to the live versions of most U2 these days).

The vinyl has a bit more dynamic but that has more to do with the nature of vinyl itself than with the mastering. The vinyl uses the same compressed master as the CD. And yes, the songs are not any better hehehe.

 

[Nick66]

The vinyl has a bit more dynamic but that has more to do with the nature of vinyl itself than with the mastering. The vinyl uses the same compressed master as the CD. And yes, the songs are not any better hehehe.

Interesting. Often bands will do a separate master for vinyl, but it sounds like in this case they didn't.

No big deal, it's not one of my favourite records anyway, even if it did have a better master I doubt I'd listen to it any more.

 

[OpenG180]

Interesting. Often bands will do a separate master for vinyl, but it sounds like in this case they didn't.

No big deal, it's not one of my favourite records anyway, even if it did have a better master I doubt I'd listen to it any more.

And tho it's not a very good album on vinyl, it's one of the rarest and more expensive... Rattle and Hum, on the other hand, is very cheap and the only U2 vinyl that comes close of being an audiophile release. Not counting Joshua Tree remastered on the double vinyl. That is excellent too.

 

[Nick66]

And tho it's not a very good album on vinyl, it's one of the rarest and more expensive... Rattle and Hum, on the other hand, is very cheap and the only U2 vinyl that comes close of being an audiophile release.

Yeah, and it helps that the studio tracks on R&H are among the best U2 have recorded.

 

[OpenG180]

Yeah, and it helps that the studio tracks on R&H are among the best U2 have recorded.

Not only they are among the best but they are among the most iconic if that makes any sense..

 

[corianderstem]

Bomb is pretty much unlistenable to me because of the mastering. ABOY is the worst -

Yahweh is the track that makes me the angriest because of the mastering. It sounds terrible, and it's such a lovely song.

I just don't understand why the artists don't stop this trend. Is it because they don't have a say in the matter? That just boggles me.

Or do they think it sounds good? That just boggles me even more.

I mean, we know why the record companies (or whoever makes the call to "make it sound real loud, everyone likes loud these days!"), but why do the artists go along with it? You'd think someone like U2 would have enough clout to say "cut that shit out, not on our records."

NLOTH sounded much better than Bomb, but if I recall correctly, there are still a few spots where the it sounds distorted (I don't even know if that's the right term).

 

[OpenG180]

Yahweh is the track that makes me the angriest because of the mastering. It sounds terrible, and it's such a lovely song.

I just don't understand why the artists don't stop this trend. Is it because they don't have a say in the matter? That just boggles me.

Or do they think it sounds good? That just boggles me even more.

I mean, we know why the record companies (or whoever makes the call to "make it sound real loud, everyone likes loud these days!"), but why do the artists go along with it? You'd think someone like U2 would have enough clout to say "cut that shit out, not on our records."

It's not as bad today as it was back in 04-05. But it's not great either.

 

[digitize]

U2 were probably at least partially responsible for getting NLOTH a semi-respectable mastering job. But the whole loudness war does really baffle me. I really don't think that peoples' buying decisions are actually influenced by how loud a song is, except for maybe some who actively shy away from buying absurdly loud records. And radio stations make it so that all songs are already pretty much the same volume on the radio. It's absurd.

 

[Nick66]

Yahweh is the track that makes me the angriest because of the mastering. It sounds terrible, and it's such a lovely song.

I just don't understand why the artists don't stop this trend. Is it because they don't have a say in the matter? That just boggles me.

Or do they think it sounds good? That just boggles me even more.

I mean, we know why the record companies (or whoever makes the call to "make it sound real loud, everyone likes loud these days!"), but why do the artists go along with it? You'd think someone like U2 would have enough clout to say "cut that shit out, not on our records."

NLOTH sounded much better than Bomb, but if I recall correctly, there are still a few spots where the it sounds distorted (I don't even know if that's the right term).

The artists, including U2, go along with it for the same reasons the record companies want it...they think, rightly or wrongly, they have to do it to compete and sell records in today's music environment. Some artists are fighting back against it...but I doubt U2, who desperately want to be on the radio, would ever do that, especially at this stage of the game.

I agree that NLOTH sounds better than Bomb....but there's definitely distortion on that one as well, including the title track (I was just listening to it on headphones last night), which I adore.

 

[digitize]

I agree that NLOTH sound better than Bomb....but there's definitely distortion on that one as well, including the title track, which I adore.

That has always annoyed me about the title track of NLOTH. It's such a great song, and Eno/Lanois did such a great production job on it. The mastering isn't abhorrent, but it could have been so much better.

 

[Nick66]

That has always annoyed me about the title track of NLOTH. It's such a great song, and Eno/Lanois did such a great production job on it. The mastering isn't abhorrent, but it could have been so much better.

Yeah...it's really a lovely album for headphones, so many richly layered and textured sounds on that one...and parts of it are just ruined w/distortion.

 

[OpenG180]

Some artists don't go along with that shit, tho. Axl Rose, for example, made sure that shitty record Chinese Democracy was released with the full dynamics intact. The Beatles and the new Pink Floyd remasters are very dynamic too.

 

[Nick66]

Some artists don't go along with that shit, tho. Axl Rose, for example, made sure that shitty record Chinese Democracy was released with the full dynamics intact. The Beatles and the new Pink Floyd remasters are very dynamic too.

Yeah, those new Floyd remasters are very well done. In fact, that series of "Discovery" re-issues should be a lesson to U2 on how to do it properly. Just compare the Dark Side reissue to AB in terms of content alone.

In fairness, though, neither Floyd or the Beatles are fighting for radio airplay, and those are reissues, not new releases. But you're right about GnR, and I think other bands are taking a stand against it as well.

 

[OpenG180]

Yeah, those new Floyd remasters are very well done. In fact, that series of "Discovery" re-issues should be a lesson to U2 on how to do it properly. Just compare the Dark Side reissue to AB.

Agreed. Pink Floyd did a perfect job with the reissues.

 

[prbiker15]

Good song, just terribly mastered. Not much to say, but it's not bad. Just doesn't have anything spectacular. 5.

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

U2 were probably at least partially responsible for getting NLOTH a semi-respectable mastering job. But the whole loudness war does really baffle me. I really don't think that peoples' buying decisions are actually influenced by how loud a song is, except for maybe some who actively shy away from buying absurdly loud records. And radio stations make it so that all songs are already pretty much the same volume on the radio. It's absurd.

yeah, loudness wars have existed since at least the 70s and it's got way out of hand. it used to be some singles would be louder, then the singles would be louder on the album. now everything is brickwalled.

and while you're right about radio stations playing everything at the same volume, the compression of the tracks makes those brickwalled songs seem louder (even though they're not). i'm with you though, i don't see how making a song louder somehow makes people think a song is better. one could argue that since the whole brickwalling thing started, record sales have slumped and that could be one of the reasons why.