Very much sums up my feelings as well. I remember listening to Bomb the first time on an LA-Sydney flight and being underwhelmed. I had just loaded the record onto my iPod and specifically saved listening to it the first time for the long flight. Then as one song went to the next and the next, I kept hoping it would get better and remember getting this sinking feeling about the whole thing...it just never got very good and then it was over. And the production on that record is so harsh I was just fatigued at the end.
Still, it was U2 and I continued to give it a chance hoping it would grow on me. I listened to it all around Wellington and Christchurch the next few months, but never really connected with it. It's not a bad record (U2 hasn't made a bad record), it's just a mediocre one. I rank near the bottom of my list, trading places with SOI.
The best thing I'll say about it is, a few years later I went back to Wellington to teach at the Uni there one summer, and listening to it again brought back a lot of great memories of the first time I was there. Music is amazing that way.
Thanks for the reply, Nick66. Sorry for this long response!
I strongly agree it is a very disappointing and empty feeling to realize you have not connected with an album from a favorite and personally treasured band/artist. Now I don't take such an occurrence so seriously, but up until that time U2 had been batting an extraordinarily high average with me. So it was a tough blow to realize perhaps these guys didn't speak to me - in a musical and lyrical sense - the way they used to. Thankfully, the last two albums have been mild improvements in this personal regard.
In my opinion what also hurt the album, in comparison to ATYCLB, was the expectations versus the final product. With ATYCLB, a lot fans knew ahead of time there was going to be a certain amount of going-back-to-basics. I felt what they delivered was a successful attempt at going back to the well without tripping or completely copying themselves along the way. It was probably as strong a retreat back to an older sound as U2 could do at that point, and they pulled it off.
So what was next? I had hoped for them to attempt something a little more daring and risky after "righting the ship", so to speak. Bomb was not that album for me. It seemed different enough from ATYCLB, but also strangely felt like more of the same. Unlike ATYCLB, it actually now sounded like they were in a holding pattern or treading water. They were not taking the next leap I had hoped for. Maybe, after all the success of ATYCLB and the Elevation tour, Bomb is exactly what they thought the public wanted from them....but it felt like a letdown of sorts to me.
I'll also admit, through my own naiveté I got suckered by Bono's comments. It's all on me, but I totally bought into the whole "mother of all rock tunes", "punk rock on Venus" and, of course "The Edge is on fire". The band also mentioned comparisons to their early albums. Add it all up and I was pretty disappointed with the album. Again, it's my bad for buying in...but still.
About the no bad albums: I think there are several U2 albums that "don't work", but I would not classify them as bad records overall - certainly not skeletons in the closet or anything. For whatever faults they have, they always meet a minimal level of quality and consistency on each album. How many artists or bands who have been recording as long as U2 can honestly claim that? Don't know whether to chalk that up to professionalism or what, but they don't have a complete dud in all of their LPs. I'll always defend this about U2.