I think the band was going in the right direction with Pop. It took me many years to realize that. I think the band was moving in a direction more concerned with subtletly. I appreciate the fact now that Bono was singing in a lower register on a lot of the album. I know a lot of this stemmed from the fact that he lost his voice around that time, but at the same time i can't help but feel...this is the way it should be. I like Bono singing in a lower tone. It was more conversational. More detailed. His lyrics were a lot less forgiving. It seemed more realistic. That's one of the things that jarred me about that album, was his willingness to just say things bluntly, without any reassurance or optimisim. Like Dylan's best lyrics, Bono was just singing about things as they were, not projecting them into larger than life formats. Even tho i enjoy most of ATYCLB, i say that the only reason, and i mean the ONLY REASON they went that 2000's route, is because of the mixed reactions after POP. I truly believed
(about POP) that they believed this was how their music should sound. But i think they became way too addicted to being #1, and this is what killed them overall, creatively. That was the moment the U2 spirit died. From then on out is when they started to care more about relevance than artistry. And i know what you're thinking, that AB occured because of the same line of thinking, them being relevant. I disagree. I think that AB was a natural change for them. Listen to Hawkmoon, Desire, God Part II. There lies the sound of a band ready to rock out. The sound of U2 on ATYCLB is of a band trying to recapture their former glory. I always felt that, even tho i like the album. But it always seemed like an all too conscious effort to recapture their past earnestness.