Yeah, just different strokes. What you like in music in general etc. See I'm the opposite of you. I think Zooropa sounds like U2's freshest, most inspired album and that the Bomb is U2's most creatively stale effort. Zooropa, from start to finish, was recorded in 4 months, maybe less. You'd expect them in that short amount of time to just bang out some average, very U2 sounding songs, or something simplistic and fairly unoriginal. Like 10 Elevations or something. Yet what popped out was probably U2's most different and unique sounding album. Along with the chimey 80's atmospheric sound they kinda made their own, I think of the Zooropa sound as U2's other original turf. You can't quite find anything else that sounds quite like that. Plenty of influences, yes, but they're in a space there that is distinctly and definitely U2, and also not like anyone else at all. I love that it was recorded so quickly, the idea that it wasn't something they worked towards, but something that was just buzzing in their heads and they just had to let it out. They had no album due then, it was a complete surprise to everyone including their record company and even themselves. It would be like us receiving an email from U2.com now out of nowhere, declaring that a new U2 album was coming out next month, and then it just sounds like nothing else on earth. To me, Zooropa is the anti-Bomb. It is everything the Bomb isn't and I love Zooropa for all the exact same reasons that I hate the Bomb. NOT because it is experimental, NOT because it is 'weird', simply because it's fucking great, original, fresh, and just sounds like it's caught something and bottled it. That + the songs on Zooropa are far better. The bottom half of Zooropa is better than the top half of the Bomb.
It's interesting to see how people who love the same band can feel so differently about the songs.
It's the guitar sound he's taking , Just wait for zoo dvd so u can hear it in all glory , The effect is called Tremolo
I was just listening a bit too closely I guess. 
