Convince me that POP is a great album!

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
i don't mean to sound like the album is a cash grab, but i do think that U2 were trying very hard to process and assimilate the sounds of club culture into their music, and they either didn't have enough time or that techno itself is structurally resistant to such assimilation.

i agree that sales are irrelevant, and i never brought them up. but i think Pop's problem is not one necessarily of motivation but of lack of execution. it simply isn't as good -- vague term, i know -- as their best albums. for me, it's a lower mid-tier U2 album. but it's fascinating. i occasionally listen to it and it's surprises me each time i hear it. that's a nice break from, say, the thrilling and effective obviousness of Bomb. but that, for me, isn't enough to engender love. i will say i love the live versions of "Gone" and "Please," even "Mofo," and the restructured IGWSHA is certainly shimmering and lovely. i think Miami is interesting, but i think Playboy Mansion is an unmitigated disaster. and so on and so forth.

i think this is the best read on Pop, for me much more authoritative than U2 by U2:

The New York Times

February 9, 1997, Sunday, Late Edition - Final

Searching For a Sound to Bridge The Decades

BYLINE: By JON PARELES

SECTION: Section 2; Page 1; Column 1; Arts and Leisure Desk

LENGTH: 2750 words

DATELINE: DUBLIN



IT WAS CRUNCH TIME FOR U2. THE IRISH band's next single had to be finished within three days, and the deadline for the complete album, which had not yet been entitled "Pop," was less than a month away. U2, with its producers and engineers, was recording and mixing in two studios simultaneously. Workdays stretched to 14 and 16 hours. But even at that stage, everything was subject to change -- including, as it turned out, the final deadline. "We have trouble finishing things," said the Edge, U2's guitarist. The album, originally due last September as a pre-Christmas release, was finished in late December, with all-night recording sessions up to the last minute. It is to be released March 4.
During the nine months it took to make "Pop," U2 invited a few journalists in to watch the band record. This observer joined the group just as it was finishing the single, which was released last week. It was a rare chance for an outsider to see a process that usually takes place in private. For a band like U2, making an album is essentially a slow-motion improvisation in which ideas are seized and refined while the tapes roll. What state was the album in? "Chaos," said Bono, U2's lead singer. "Promise," said the Edge.


U2 was intent on renewing itself, determined to sound like neither its 1980's incarnation -- as the most achingly sincere, and sometimes self-important, band of the decade -- or the raucous, buzz-and-crunch rock band that has survived the short attention spans of the early 1990's. Like R.E.M. in the United States, U2 has been able to maintain the respect of alternative rockers while reaching a broader audience; unlike R.E.M., whose latest album was a commercial disappointment, U2 will wholeheartedly promote "Pop" with a world tour that begins in the spring. U2's label, Island, and much of the recording business hope that U2 is one group from the 1980's that can still sell like superstars.
U2 made "Boy," its 1980 debut album, when its four members, friends from high school, were still teen-agers. The combination of the Edge's echoing guitar, Bono's impassioned voice and the martial rhythms of Adam Clayton on bass and Larry Mullen on drums was an arena-size peal, as instantly recognizable as the sound of the Who. The music itself evoked idealism with the resonance of a cathedral while carrying lyrics about adolescent turmoil and mystical Christianity. U2 made honesty sound like a holy quest, and millions of listeners responded, hearing their own yearnings in choruses like "I still haven't found what I'm looking for."
The band's old approach continues to reverberate in best-selling bands like Live. But in 1988, U2 reached a dead end with "Rattle and Hum." As it strained to create the sound of integrity, it ended up with awkward emulations of American blues and soul. So, a decade into its career, U2 transformed itself for its 1991 album, "Achtung Baby." It exchanged transparency for distortion and earnestness for a nervy ambiguity. "We were absolutely adamant that we didn't want to sound like U2," the Edge said. "We're so much better if we don't know what we're doing, because if it's too easy, then that's what it sounds like -- too easy."
For its Zoo TV world tour in 1992, U2 filled stadiums as it performed amid a barrage of television imagery, mocking and savoring both the global marketplace and U2's own celebrity. "Zooropa," released in 1993, certified that U2 wasn't looking back. "We're probably the only European band of our generation still releasing relevant records and still playing in large spaces," said Adam Clayton, U2's bass player. "We've grown up along with a section of our audience. But we've always been relevant to a younger audience, and we enjoy that position too much to give it up unwittingly. I think that in rock-and-roll, for a credible artist, the age limit may be about 35. But if you stay honest, you can push the age restriction a bit." Clayton and Bono are 36 years old; the Edge and Mullen are 35.
"Rock-and-roll is obsessed with juvenilia," said Bono. "But the sense of threat that rock-and-roll has is actually not about boys. There's nothing scary about a man trying to be a boy. Men are scarier than boys."
Before starting "Pop," U2 took a year off, then made "Passengers: Original Soundtracks 1," which was billed as a collaboration by Brian Eno and the four band members. It's an album of songs for real and imaginary films, full of eerie textures and juxtapositions; it eased the band back into the studio. By the time U2 started working on "Pop," the band's ninth full-length album, its members had grown fascinated by current dance music.
To make "Pop," U2 chose two producers. Flood, a soft-spoken Englishman, worked on "Zooropa" and has also produced albums for Depeche Mode and Smashing Pumpkins. Howie B., a disk jockey and remixer with his own independent label, Pussyfoot, is fluent in subgenres from acid jazz to trip-hop to techno to drum-and-bass to lounge. Potentially, Flood could shape the monumental tones and dynamics of arena rock; Howie B. could manipulate off-the-wall samples and sustain the abstract rhythms heard at after-hours dance clubs. Like David Bowie, whose new album, "Earthling," embraces the chattering electronic rhythms of drum-and-bass dance music, U2 hears its future in up-to-date grooves. But it but doesn't intend to abandon melody.
"Musicians, painters, whatever, they have no choice but to describe where they live," said Bono, whose ordinary conversation is often true to a tradition of Irish bards. "Sometimes it may seem hard to keep your ear on the street because there's a lot of stuff you don't want to pick up. But as Bob Dylan said, 'He not busy being born is busy dying,' and I think the death starts in your record collection. I like to feel alive. I think I'm awake, and this is the noise that keeps me awake."
AFTER "POP" WAS FINISHED, Bono described it as "a mixed-up kid of a record." Behind its surface exuberance, "Discotheque" broods over the elusiveness of love; from there, much of the album is moody and introspective. "Discotheque' is to get people dizzy so we can take advantage of them for the rest of the album," Bono said. The songs, consistent with U2's past, are often about searching: for love, for faith, for purpose. Amid the hipster drumbeats and rough-cut guitars, the songs are willing to confide their uncertainty. "That seems to be what U2 has to do now, to keep the context opposite the content," Bono said. "People think we're fun, but it's very personal music."
The title "Pop" was deliberately chosen. "Even though this record sounds like a sprawl, and the sounds are quite radical, there's a songwriting discipline at work here which is kind of pop," Bono said. "We were also annoyed at the word rock."
"It's a record about looking for some kind of transcendence as well as trash," he added. "And looking under the trash is where you seem to find that transcendence. In among the noise, that's where I hear that whisper."
But the concept was a matter of hindsight. In an era of 48-track recording, studio albums are less the execution of a conceptual blueprint than they are accretions of details: planned and improvised, inspired and accidental. A finished song is the residue of innumerable decisions, painstakingly assembled in the hope of sounding spontaneous and ineluctably right. "Sometimes a song is like a crystal," the Edge said. "Everything just develops in a clear and obvious way. But not very often."
The process can be wearying. "Options are the enemy," Bono said. "A door opens and you walk through it, and you're down a lane way, and there's a light on in somebody's bedroom, and you knock on a door, you're upstairs, you have a glass of wine, and the next thing you know you're in Italy. There are all these diversions, and they're so tantalizing."
In the studio, U2 keeps its options open. As its deadline loomed, the band had nearly two albums' worth of material in various stages of completion. Almost invariably, the words would come last, as Bono and the Edge responded to the mood of the music they had assembled. "Sometimes it takes a few months for a record to focus," the Edge said. "You've got a lot of nearly finished ideas that could go lots of different ways, and then suddenly you see how things interact." On a board charting the progress of songs were notations like "Try new melody on chorus" and, for "Do You Feel Loved," the injunction: "Pop vs. rock . . . discuss."
U2's policy is to discuss everything. The band makes its decisions by consensus, over lunches and dinners or in the studio. "Everybody gets involved in everything," Mullen explained. "Sometimes that can be a real pain, because everybody's got opinions. But we've fine-tuned it over the years, and we're all fighting for the same thing in the end, to make great songs."
Flood, who has seen all sorts of approaches to recording, was impressed by U2's insistence on unanimity. "They're very egoless," he said. "The ego has to do with the four of them, not each of them separately."
For today's session, the first task was to wrap up the single. "Discotheque" would be the song to announce that U2 was back in action, with a jabbing, insistent guitar hook and echoes of dance hits from "Dance to the Music" to "Love to Love You, Baby." The song begins with the line, "You can reach but you can't grab it." Bono described it as "an earnest little riddle about love, though it comes off as bubble gum." "
For the past few days, Flood and U2 had been re-editing "Discotheque," shuffling its sections -- which had been assigned names like "Drugs" and "Religious" -- with a computer. Over lunch, listening to various versions, the whole band had approved a structure. But Bono wasn't happy with the way he had sung the word "tonight" three times in the song's last verse. "All right, Conal, full disco!" Bono instructed the assistant engineer, who flicked some switches. In the control room, above the console, a spotlight illuminated a mirror ball; a machine projected a city skyline on the wall.
Bono clutched a microphone and started tapping his foot to the music. To record three words, he would sing the song all the way through; perhaps he would improve on the existing takes. He sang while half-climbing out of his chair, then stepped up onto a table and worked his arms and chest as if he were on stage. He tried singing in a big, melodramatic voice, and then in a gentle falsetto; he tried a slight hesitation before the third "tonight." Flood stayed poker-faced and silent until Bono asked what he thought. "The first line sounded good, the second ----" He shrugged.
BONO DANCED AND SHOUTED through the song again, working up a sweat by the time he was satisfied. The single wasn't done yet, however. Flood and the Edge would still be supervising alternate versions: one without vocals for television studio appearances, another without samples in case permissions weren't granted, and a third, four-minute version for radio stations. Mullen, who had avoided reading the lyric sheet, would listen to make sure he could understand the words. "I'm the lyric police," he said. The next night, the band would approve final mixes.
After his session, Bono decided to unwind with a Guinness at the local pub. A warning glance from U2's office manager turned out to be about his waistline. "Look," he said to her, pulling up his shirt. "Fat Elvis is gone." As he stood at the bar, a local man struck up a conversation about a house Bono used to live in. "You remember when you were robbed of a VCR and a couple of TV's?" the man asked. "That was me." Bono shrugged his forgiveness and asked the man what he had been doing since; he was regaled with a catalogue of petty crimes.
With "Discotheque" more or less complete, the single needed a B side: a finished second-echelon song not destined for the album. In U2's own studio, with a view of Dublin's Grand Canal basin, Howie B., Clayton and an assistant were working on "If You Wear That Velvet Dress," a smoky ballad filled with troubled longing. What it lacked was momentum, and Howie B. was trying to find it. Then, in the many arrangements the band had recorded, he did: a nudge from the bass at the end of one verse, a glimmering sample from a contemporary classical album in another, floating bell tones and the piece de resistance: a hovering Hammond organ chord drifting in and out of the mix. Well after midnight, Clayton told Howie B. that the song didn't sound like a B side anymore; it could be an album track. Howie B. and his bleary-eyed assistant shared a gleeful high-five.
Over lunch the next day, the band and both producers considered whether to make "Velvet Dress" an album track. Was it too similar in mood to other songs in the works? "It's really intense," Flood said, "and then you can't put anything else in that style on your album, which I think is really positive. It pushes you."
Two songs were complete. "Now we know how to finish the others," the Edge said. "Let's think of them all as B sides."
Since "Velvet Dress" was now headed for the album, the single still needed a B side, with the deadline two days away. "This is kind of a pressure situation," the Edge said. A new candidate for the B side was "Holy Joe," which in its current state was a three-chord rocker with no words beyond a few opening lines -- "I'm a humble guy/ No, really, I try" -- and a chorus, "Come on, be good to me." Bono and the Edge were sequestered, trying to come up with the rest of the words. Flood, Howie B. and Mullen were going over the rhythm track, pulling out the punchiest sections, turning them into loops to use as the beat for the song.
BONO EMERGED WITH another B-side possibility: "North and South of the River," a song he wrote with Christy Moore, whom he calls "Ireland's Woody Guthrie." Written after warring factions in Northern Ireland announced a cease-fire agreement in 1994, it's a hopeful song about two lovers; the music merges the forthright marches of the old U2 with a hint of Motown backbeat. The song was complete, lyrics and all, although Bono would want to alter a few lines since the cease-fire hadn't put an end to the violence. The band gathered in the control room to listen to the song anew, and Bono asked for reactions. The song would be a serious flip side to the uptempo "Discotheque." Would the contrast be a good idea? The consensus was no; the song was too somber and political, too much like the old U2, for the band's re-emergence. Bono, biting his nails, went back to writing.
The Edge ambled into the control room with a guitar technician who hooked up an antique Gretsch guitar. He started to play along with the rhythm section: ferocious strummed chords, then choppier ones, then choked semi-funk, track upon track. "Holy Joe" was starting to sound like the Rolling Stones' "Street Fighting Man."
Soon, Bono walked by with an open laptop; a few minutes later, he returned with a printout of the new lyrics. Edge scrutinized them with an editor's concentration. "It's just a sketch," Bono said, but Flood wanted him to record a vocal so that the band could build more music around it. Bono was looking for a rhyme for "precocious." When Clayton asked if "unctuous" has ever been used in a song, Bono misheard. "Anxious?" he said. "I'll take anxious."
He sang the new words, in high and low octaves, with other band members offering suggestions about tone and phrasing. But the song still wasn't crisp enough. As Bono and the Edge went off to refine the lyrics, Mullen decided to add percussion. An assistant brought in a djembe, an African hand drum. When Mullen hit it, the control-room speaker made a squawk of distortion.
Flood didn't hear a problem; he heard a noise to be exploited. Quickly, he and an assistant pointed a microphone at the tortured speaker, which emitted a raunchy, rhythmic hoot. Mullen added more layers of percussion: hand drums, egg-shaped rattles, maracas. Howie B., who had two turntables hooked up to the console, rooted through his record collection to find a useful sample -- horns from a Dean Martin album, perhaps? The Edge returned to try wah-wah guitar chords, then conferred with Clayton about what key the song was now in; each had his own theory. Bono sang up high, and then in a cackling whisper. The song had suddenly veered in a new direction, raw and rhythmic, and U2, with grins all around, was ready to chase it.
 
Two things:

1. Please define relevance.



cultural headspace. this can be measured in part by sales, but not totally nor exclusively. are people talking about your album? are journalists writing about it? are you on magazine covers? which magazines? are you winning awards? are people discussing whether you deserve those awards? in short, do people care?
 
cultural headspace. this can be measured in part by sales, but not totally nor exclusively. are people talking about your album? are journalists writing about it? are you on magazine covers? which magazines? are you winning awards? are people discussing whether you deserve those awards? in short, do people care?

Good answer...you said it better than I did.
 
I think this is an interesting contrast between the NYT 1997 article (which is a great read), and Bono in 2005:

"Even though this record sounds like a sprawl, and the sounds are quite radical, there's a songwriting discipline at work here which is kind of pop,"
-1997

"Imagine if "Discotheque" was a No. 1 pop song? Now that record makes sense. We didn't have the discipline to screw the thing down."
-2005

As an aside, I think the 1997 article only confirms McG's conclusion that Pop had "too many cooks in the kitchen". And Adam's comments reveal that yes, even then they were concerned with "relevance".
 
Well, U2 uses the term "relevance" all the time, not me. So ask them (see below). I think it's probably about getting on the radio, being all over the media, and people talking about you like you matter. But who knows.

And I never said Pop's "sole" purpose was to get U2 played in clubs...I said that was one of the goals (which it was)...I also said they wanted it all over the radio. Which they did.

U2 has made a lot of comments about Pop over the years, from how it strayed too far from their own sound, to how it just never achieved greatness. But I think this may be the most relevant to what were discussing now:



Cue "Bono lies" mem in 5...4...3...

Cool, this is where I (and I assume the OP) wanted the discussion to go, past motivations and on to the actual execution of the thing.

I agree fully with Bono that U2 did not "screw it down" properly when it came to integrating the sound of the times (at least in Europe) into the traditional U2 sound. What I question is why that is necessary. To me, the album's most successful tracks are its most daring. I can't describe to you how much fun I have listening to those beats swirl around on Mofo while Bono pours his heart out. It's an ugly-sounding track, but it suits the lyrics. You can feel the heat radiating off of Do You Feel Loved, which is again suitable for the message. While I know you disagree, I must say that I feel those two tracks in particular have very well chosen beats; not incongruous with the lyrics at all. Discotheque is belabored but fun; rather than riding a terrific groove like the following two tracks, it feels like individual parts soldered together, but it works OK. It set a bad precedent for tracks like GOYB though.

If I have any specific problem with how Pop was conceived, I think it's that any U2 album that can't be performed live, an album that lacks that four-guys-in-a-room aspect is bound to be a little weaker. U2 as a band has tremendous chemistry, and songs like Discotheque feel like a compilation of takes rather than fully refined songs. In that sense, I think maybe it was a good thing that they stopped before the album became unrecognizable. There are a number of fantastic rock songs here that are victims of overly muddy production (a symptom of overproduction more often than the reverse). Those tracks soared live, as they should have.

The necessary thread that connects the album's disparate parts is Bono's cynical lyricism, which is at its apex here. It's very unfortunate that he chose to scale back his frankness for future releases, because angry Bono has always been the most inspirational mode of the man. These are lyrics worth examining, perhaps even reading as poetry. There's intrigue and drama in each track, and even shittier ones like Miami conjure up an image. Whether a beat is blasting over him (Do You Feel Loved) or a searing guitar (Gone), Bono is the thoughtful eye of the hurricane. With a worse set of lyrics, I might find Pop unbearably inhuman and contrived, but there's a sobering warmth to the album thanks to him. In that context, the music (re: "sound of the times") is the backdrop for the considerations he was having. It was as if U2 were trying to turn their collective headspace into an album. Which is partially why it flopped.

I think the rock songs should have been a bit more raw and the ballads cut or tweaked, but to be honest, I find Pop one of their easiest albums to play all the way through. Once I sink in to Do You Feel Loved, I know what I'm in for. Pop is one of those dark, seductive albums that doesn't let go once it has you. I've probably spent more time thinking about it than any other U2 release, and that's high praise. It deserves a second and third and fourth listen because it's so dense and the band put so much of themselves into the album, whatever their motivations for its direction may have been. They definitely got lost in the music, only to wake up in a ditch somewhere outside of town. Pop is the souvenir from the wild night that got them there.
 
cultural headspace. this can be measured in part by sales, but not totally nor exclusively. are people talking about your album? are journalists writing about it? are you on magazine covers? which magazines? are you winning awards? are people discussing whether you deserve those awards? in short, do people care?

This is a good answer, but I still don't know who the "people" caring are. What demographic do they fall into? What do they listen to? And how would you go about catering an album to them?
 
Cool, this is where I (and I assume the OP) wanted the discussion to go, past motivations and on to the actual execution of the thing.

I agree fully with Bono that U2 did not "screw it down" properly when it came to integrating the sound of the times (at least in Europe) into the traditional U2 sound. What I question is why that is necessary. To me, the album's most successful tracks are its most daring. I can't describe to you how much fun I have listening to those beats swirl around on Mofo while Bono pours his heart out. It's an ugly-sounding track, but it suits the lyrics. You can feel the heat radiating off of Do You Feel Loved, which is again suitable for the message. While I know you disagree, I must say that I feel those two tracks in particular have very well chosen beats; not incongruous with the lyrics at all. Discotheque is belabored but fun; rather than riding a terrific groove like the following two tracks, it feels like individual parts soldered together, but it works OK. It set a bad precedent for tracks like GOYB though.

If I have any specific problem with how Pop was conceived, I think it's that any U2 album that can't be performed live, an album that lacks that four-guys-in-a-room aspect is bound to be a little weaker. U2 as a band has tremendous chemistry, and songs like Discotheque feel like a compilation of takes rather than fully refined songs. In that sense, I think maybe it was a good thing that they stopped before the album became unrecognizable. There are a number of fantastic rock songs here that are victims of overly muddy production (a symptom of overproduction more often than the reverse). Those tracks soared live, as they should have.

The necessary thread that connects the album's disparate parts is Bono's cynical lyricism, which is at its apex here. It's very unfortunate that he chose to scale back his frankness for future releases, because angry Bono has always been the most inspirational mode of the man. These are lyrics worth examining, perhaps even reading as poetry. There's intrigue and drama in each track, and even shittier ones like Miami conjure up an image. Whether a beat is blasting over him (Do You Feel Loved) or a searing guitar (Gone), Bono is the thoughtful eye of the hurricane. With a shittier set of lyrics, I might find Pop unbearably inhuman and contrived, but there's a sobering warmth to the album thanks to him.

I think the rock songs should have been a bit more raw and the ballads cut or tweaked, but to be honest, I find Pop one of their easiest albums to play all the way through. Once I sink in to Do You Feel Loved, I know what I'm in for. Pop is one of those dark, seductive albums that doesn't let go once it has you. I've probably spent more time thinking about it than any other U2 release, and that's high praise. It deserves a second and third and fourth listen because it's so dense and the band put so much of themselves into the album, whatever their motivations for its direction may have been. They definitely got lost in the music, only to wake up in a ditch somewhere outside of town. Pop is the souvenir from the wild night before.

Well, that's a fantastic expression of why you love Pop, and I definitely respect that. You clearly have the same feelings about it that I have, for example, about TUF. And while Pop's not my thing (something I may have expressed at time or two), liking it or hating is just a matter of taste, of course. There's a lot I respect about Pop, in particular what they were trying to do...but it just didn't connect with me the way it obviously has you (and many others here apparently). But I didn't "come of age" with Pop, and Pop U2 was never my U2. I did love SATS, that was the song of my summer, and to this day it's one of my U2 Top 10. And there's a few others on there I like as well.

I just think there's too many layers there separating U2 from the listener...too many sequencers and syntesizers, too much Flood screwing around in the studio. One of my favourite stories about the post-Pop fallout was an ancedote from Bono in 2000 that pretty much sums up how I felt about it:

"We finally realized on the PopMart tour that it was time for us to start stripping back again," says Bono, who recalls a telling moment during the PopMart U.S. tour.

"We got into Washington, D.C., before all our equipment arrived and rehearsed with just guitar, bass and drums - none of the loops or samples that we had been attaching to the songs. Howie B. came in during the middle of the rehearsal and he said, `Wow, what a sound. What is this?' We told him it was us, it was what U2 sounds like. I think that's when we realized that it was time for us to get back to the essence of what we do."
-Bono, 2000
 
This is a good answer, but I still don't know who the "people" caring are. What demographic do they fall into? What do they listen to? And how would you go about catering an album to them?


Generally, white males aged 18-49. They have the dollars to spend.

But not as much now as it was back in 1997.
 
I think this is an interesting contrast between the NYT 1997 article (which is a great read), and Bono in 2005:

As an aside, I think the 1997 article only confirms McG's conclusion that Pop had "too many cooks in the kitchen". And Adam's comments reveal that yes, even then they were concerned with "relevance".


Right. It was a problem in execution. What's amazing about AB, Zooropa, and especially Zoo TV is how thought through they are.

The Pop-era is much more muddled and confused.
 
Well, that's a fantastic expression of why you love Pop, and I definitely respect that. You clearly have the same feelings about it that I have, for example, about TUF. And while Pop's not my thing (something I may have expressed at time or two), liking it or hating is just a matter of taste, of course. There's a lot I respect about Pop, in particular what they were trying to do...but it just didn't connect with me the way it obviously has you (and many others here apparently). But I didn't "come of age" with Pop, and Pop U2 was never my U2. I did love SATS, that was the song of my summer, and to this day it's one of my U2 Top 10. And there's a few others on there I like as well.

I just think there's too many layers there separating U2 from the listener...too many sequencers and syntesizers, too much Flood screwing around in the studio. One of my favourite stories about the post-Pop fallout was an ancedote from Bono in 2000 that pretty much sums up how I felt about it:

I am totally with you that the album can be too busy. Especially on IGWSHA and Gone, it's a bit comical how much is going on when the message being offered is actually quite simple and would be better delivered in a subtle manner. On the other hand, Mofo and Wake Up Dead Man see U2 at their most emotionally wrought, so I can understand the sonic overload there. I think the primary flaw of Pop is that the production overwhelms the songs at times, and there certainly seems to be a consensus there. There is a uniformly busy and ecstatic production style on Pop; sometimes it works, and sometimes it doesn't. Certainly, it sounds nothing like other U2 albums, in terms of EQing, mixing, panning and so on. You notice this more on the tracks that function more within the U2 wheelhouse. As their stories corroborate, there were certainly drugs involved. :)
 
The best thing about Pop is how great the songs ended up being live. That's mostly what I have to say about it.

That and the collection of b sides and remixes. There's just so much material to enjoy beyond the album itself.
 
A perfect example of irrelevance is The Offspring. They released an album last year. Did anyone care? No!
 
A perfect example of irrelevance is The Offspring. They released an album last year. Did anyone care? No!

The Offspring are competing with INXS and The Darkness in the category of Bands No One Gives A Shit About But Continue Regardless.
 
Comparisons to the Prodigy make me laugh because when you really look at it, the only song on Pop that sounds inspired by the Prodigy or Underworld is Mofo. That's it! Discotheque has dance elements but it is out and out a rock song with some kicking raw guitar! Do You Feel Loved has electronic elements but is a rock song from a similar thread as Even Better Than The Real Thing. Last Night On Earth has electronic leanings but once again is a rock song with a shout-out chorus and dirty sounding guitar. Nothing here, except for Mofo, even reminds me of the style of electronica made popular by the Chemical Brothers and the Prodigy!
 
LeMel, Irvine and Nick, thanks for those really thoughtful posts - I enjoyed reading them.

Now I feel like listening to Pop, an album I don't wholly love but kind of admire for being so messy and very interesting.
 
Yes it was a nice civilized discussion for once. Interesting to read as I have never delved that much into U2's history. I just listen to the music and try to enjoy it.
 
The Offspring are competing with INXS and The Darkness in the category of Bands No One Gives A Shit About But Continue Regardless.

I can think of one poster who gives enough of a shit about The Darkness to make up for the entire forum.
 
Yes it was a nice civilized discussion for once. Interesting to read as I have never delved that much into U2's history. I just listen to the music and try to enjoy it.

It was civilized, but it could have ended a lot sooner had either of us made a concession of some kind (which did eventually happen). Really, it's obvious that U2 does care about relevance and to say otherwise is ridiculous (though I don't believe they have or ever will craft an album with only that goal in mind) and it's also obvious that there is a massive chunk of Pop that neither relates to the sound of 1996, nor the U2 tradition. It's a strange, compromised record that is nearly impossible to discuss in absolutes. Which is why we return to it in our listening and our discussions.
 
Not sure how the Original Poster feels now, but I cannot convince the OP that Pop is a great album.

IMO it is in the bottom half of U2's own catalog.

Personally I love Wake Up Dead Man, and Please is OK. Discotheque did get some farily interesting treatments live over time as I recall.


Dunno what else to say, it just never stood out for me and the album cover looks like they stole the concept from from Kiss Dynasty.
 
Back
Top Bottom