Which is better -- 90s' U2 or 00s' U2?
- Thread starter 65980
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
I can't think of any other band whose career so often gets categorized by decade...
I think it's an odd thread, why not include the 80's, it almost seems like you were looking to stir shit.
That being said, I agree with Mikal, overall I prefer the 90's over 00's but not like many in this forum I still really enjoy a lot of their 00 material.
I think it's an odd thread, why not include the 80's, it almost seems like you were looking to stir shit.
That being said, I agree with Mikal, overall I prefer the 90's over 00's but not like many in this forum I still really enjoy a lot of their 00 material.
blueeyedgirl
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
The 90s. They were younger, so was I.
(sigh...) I brought up the topic of the 90s/00s because the two decades have a similar amount of releases, and, rather obviously, they're the two most recent decades. The 80s had many more LPs and LP-tracks, so it's a bit hard to compare in fairness.
Actually, it would be interesting to break down the released/official tracks by number from each decade, to see how many there are. But it's tricky with remixes and various versions of the same song... About the 00s, don't forget the extra tracks that were released on U27 and The Complete U2 iPod thing.
About Passengers, whatever -- count it if you want. To me, if the band didn't release it under the name "U2" then it isn't U2. Otherwise, this gets very fishy. For example, is the Mission: Impossible theme "U2"? Does Bono & Gavin Friday = U2? If you say "no, because it has to have all 4 guys", then what about Passengers, which includes Eno? Isn't that by definition, not U2? So, to me, if the record isn't labelled as "U2", then it's not U2.
Niceman
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
It's true! The Salome out-takes alone, if we were to count them, would eclipse the whole decade! lol!
But counting them isn't really fair.....
Well, my answer is the 90s, but I don't feel that its a fair competition. That was my point. 4 full albums, PLUS an embarrassment of other materials verses 3 albums and a DROUGHT of other materials... It would be impressive if the 00s did hold up against the hordes of the 90s.....As much as I love NLOTH, I feel that quantity alone decides this one....
Niceman
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
I would be interested in seeing an actual count and list - but am far too lazy to try the whole thing myself! lol!
I wouldn't count any remixes, live versions, demos as new songs btw... otherwise Mysterious Ways alone has more tracks than U2 released in the 00s!
We can argue all day about what 'counts' or doesn't count, but here's a telling fact: there was almost NO material worth debating the inclusion or not in the 00s. In the 1990s they not only released more albums, B-sides, soundtrack tracks, but they ALSO did all of those side projects.... ALL of which excited me as if it were all 4 guys, whether it was or not.....
U27 didn't have any new material on it.
Eno helped write NLOTH. Does that make NLOTH not count???
Mission Impossible WAS played on the loudspeakers before some POPMART shows...
Yes, there were a few new tracks on The Complete U2 - demo versions of the HTDAAB songs.... Um... Smile was new. I don't think there was anything else? I guess MAYBE we'd count Xanax and Wine since it was at least different enough to have it's own name.....
EDIT: Oh! I forgot Levitate! (A left-over from Pop technically) Anything else???
Vlad n U 2
Blue Crack Addict
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2008
- Messages
- 28,386
For me.
90's: (ex. Passengers)
One absolute masterpiece - Achtung Baby
Two excellent works/of classic quality - Zooropa, Pop
00's:
One excellent work/of classic quality - No Line On The Horizon
One good album - All That You Can't Leave Behind
One patchy/listenable album (that is weak by U2's standards) - How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb
90's: (ex. Passengers)
One absolute masterpiece - Achtung Baby
Two excellent works/of classic quality - Zooropa, Pop
00's:
One excellent work/of classic quality - No Line On The Horizon
One good album - All That You Can't Leave Behind
One patchy/listenable album (that is weak by U2's standards) - How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb
Okay, since I don't have much work to do this afternoon, I did the math to compare the number of 90s' (studio) tracks to 00s' tracks.
I used the following criterion (or rather, I tried -- it gets tricky):
--I counted all LP tracks, obviously
--I counted all singles tracks that aren't on LPs, obviously
--I counted "special" releases (i.e., to download, etc.) if they were commercially available to the public in most territories (I'm not counting fan-club only releases).
--I counted various versions of the same song only ONCE. So, those 452 mixes of 'Mysterious Ways' count as ONE song. I realize this is debatable with something like "No line on the Horizon 2", which I didn't count, but....
--I also didn't count "1st-versions" of songs that were later re-recorded; that is, I did not count "Xanax" or "Always" or "Native Son" (which actually lessened the # of 00s' tracks).
--I didn't count any live releases at all (which are kind of irrelevant anyway in the free-downloading era).
--With The Million Dollar Hotel soundtrack, I counted only the tracks that have "U2" on them (which is only two, but I counted "U2 with Daniel Lanois"). By the way, I counted these as 2000s' since it was released in early 2000, but of course it also be considered 90s since the new songs were recorded then; in any case, it's only two songs, so it hardly makes much difference.
--I counted cover versions ('Paint it Black', 'The Saints are Coming' et al.) as long as they were studio recordings and commercially available. (I even counted "Pop Muzik" even though it's mainly a mix of the M song.)
So, the final result is:
1990s = 53 songs
2000s = 53 songs
Yes, it's a dead tie ('draw', if you're in the UK). This 90s number doesn't include Passengers album tracks, but it does include "Miss Sarajevo" (since it was a hit single and is on the 1990-2000 U2 album).
Now, of course if we add on the other Passengers songs, we would add 13 tracks (or would we? Are all of those classifiable as U2?) and get:
1990s = 66 songs
2000s = 53 songs
But it's still not an enormous difference. Further, if I were to keep Passengers, subtract cover versions (most of which were in the 90s), and add on the variant versions of U2 songs (with completely different lyrics and in some cases, melodies), it would probably come out:
1990s = 63 songs
2000s = 56 songs
which again, is virtually the same. I think their failing in the 2000s (productivity-wise) has been the non-appearance of any interesting B-sides on the new singles of 2009. I mean, have there been any?
I used the following criterion (or rather, I tried -- it gets tricky):
--I counted all LP tracks, obviously
--I counted all singles tracks that aren't on LPs, obviously
--I counted "special" releases (i.e., to download, etc.) if they were commercially available to the public in most territories (I'm not counting fan-club only releases).
--I counted various versions of the same song only ONCE. So, those 452 mixes of 'Mysterious Ways' count as ONE song. I realize this is debatable with something like "No line on the Horizon 2", which I didn't count, but....
--I also didn't count "1st-versions" of songs that were later re-recorded; that is, I did not count "Xanax" or "Always" or "Native Son" (which actually lessened the # of 00s' tracks).
--I didn't count any live releases at all (which are kind of irrelevant anyway in the free-downloading era).
--With The Million Dollar Hotel soundtrack, I counted only the tracks that have "U2" on them (which is only two, but I counted "U2 with Daniel Lanois"). By the way, I counted these as 2000s' since it was released in early 2000, but of course it also be considered 90s since the new songs were recorded then; in any case, it's only two songs, so it hardly makes much difference.
--I counted cover versions ('Paint it Black', 'The Saints are Coming' et al.) as long as they were studio recordings and commercially available. (I even counted "Pop Muzik" even though it's mainly a mix of the M song.)
So, the final result is:
1990s = 53 songs
2000s = 53 songs
Yes, it's a dead tie ('draw', if you're in the UK). This 90s number doesn't include Passengers album tracks, but it does include "Miss Sarajevo" (since it was a hit single and is on the 1990-2000 U2 album).
Now, of course if we add on the other Passengers songs, we would add 13 tracks (or would we? Are all of those classifiable as U2?) and get:
1990s = 66 songs
2000s = 53 songs
But it's still not an enormous difference. Further, if I were to keep Passengers, subtract cover versions (most of which were in the 90s), and add on the variant versions of U2 songs (with completely different lyrics and in some cases, melodies), it would probably come out:
1990s = 63 songs
2000s = 56 songs
which again, is virtually the same. I think their failing in the 2000s (productivity-wise) has been the non-appearance of any interesting B-sides on the new singles of 2009. I mean, have there been any?
ozeeko
Refugee
Well, for me it's obviously 90's. I've talked ad nauseam about why the 90's are superior, and i really don't feel up to it at the moment.
but i will say one thing that always bothered me about the 00's. And this is just my opinion...
U2 in the 80's and 90's were about exploring new things and progressing as artists...this decade was all about trying to recapture something that isn't there anymore, something they've outgrown. I always thought ATYCLB was interesting coming from an Adult Contemporary point of view, a more stripped back, song-oriented pop affair. Songs like In a Little While and Wild Honey sounded new for them. Even the R&B influence on Stuck was something out of the ordinary. But it was Beautiful Day (don't get me wrong, a great song) that stood out, Walk On (an okay song) that stood out, Elevation (a fun song that became harbinger for future musical crimes) that stood out...these songs sounded familiar to casual fans of U2. These were songs that reminded people of 80's anthems (Beautiful Day, Walk On). What am i trying to say? That the success of ATYCLB took U2 in the wrong direction. The experimentation with R&B and pop that I digged the most on that record was forgotten, and instead U2 went for the familiar, full blown sounding anthems. BOMB amazed me with its sheer lack of inspiration. It seemed false. It seemed disengenuous. It always struck me as U2's tribute to their 80's musical legacy. They were trying to recapture that optimistic wide eyed approach that came natural when they were young. But they were past that in my opinion.
And on NLOTH, it then seemed they were trying to experiment again, but once again, they had to play to their myth. They couldn't quite commit. They needed those anthems!
But i will give them credit for coming up with some of the best songs this decade. MOS and WAS and FEZ-BB are defitinitely some awe-inspiring tunes. When U2 just go for the music it will always work out. They just gotta forget about their past and move on. You spend too much time thinking about your past, how far is that really going to get you? You can't record an album and then go "wait a second, we need a Beautiful Day type song, or a Walk On type song, and a rocker song like Vertigo and GOYB". If those songs aren't supposed to be there, then why record them? Why try to recapture something you've already done? It's time to move on!
I know they can do it. They just have to stop caring so much. And also they need to stop treating everything they do as so precious. I actually get annoyed when i read comments like "we're making the best music now, it's extraordinary, no one's ever done it b4, blah blah blah" - these sound like desperate comments to me, like even THEY are trying to convince themselves of their own quality. Forget that stuff!! Just record something and see what happens!
I wasn't expecting such a rant. Hopefully some of u understand what i'm getting at.
Do i hate the 00's? No, not in the slightest. More like I despise BOMB, but genuinely enjoy the other 2 albums, however they could've been better. Especially NLOTH.
but i will say one thing that always bothered me about the 00's. And this is just my opinion...
U2 in the 80's and 90's were about exploring new things and progressing as artists...this decade was all about trying to recapture something that isn't there anymore, something they've outgrown. I always thought ATYCLB was interesting coming from an Adult Contemporary point of view, a more stripped back, song-oriented pop affair. Songs like In a Little While and Wild Honey sounded new for them. Even the R&B influence on Stuck was something out of the ordinary. But it was Beautiful Day (don't get me wrong, a great song) that stood out, Walk On (an okay song) that stood out, Elevation (a fun song that became harbinger for future musical crimes) that stood out...these songs sounded familiar to casual fans of U2. These were songs that reminded people of 80's anthems (Beautiful Day, Walk On). What am i trying to say? That the success of ATYCLB took U2 in the wrong direction. The experimentation with R&B and pop that I digged the most on that record was forgotten, and instead U2 went for the familiar, full blown sounding anthems. BOMB amazed me with its sheer lack of inspiration. It seemed false. It seemed disengenuous. It always struck me as U2's tribute to their 80's musical legacy. They were trying to recapture that optimistic wide eyed approach that came natural when they were young. But they were past that in my opinion.
And on NLOTH, it then seemed they were trying to experiment again, but once again, they had to play to their myth. They couldn't quite commit. They needed those anthems!
But i will give them credit for coming up with some of the best songs this decade. MOS and WAS and FEZ-BB are defitinitely some awe-inspiring tunes. When U2 just go for the music it will always work out. They just gotta forget about their past and move on. You spend too much time thinking about your past, how far is that really going to get you? You can't record an album and then go "wait a second, we need a Beautiful Day type song, or a Walk On type song, and a rocker song like Vertigo and GOYB". If those songs aren't supposed to be there, then why record them? Why try to recapture something you've already done? It's time to move on!
I know they can do it. They just have to stop caring so much. And also they need to stop treating everything they do as so precious. I actually get annoyed when i read comments like "we're making the best music now, it's extraordinary, no one's ever done it b4, blah blah blah" - these sound like desperate comments to me, like even THEY are trying to convince themselves of their own quality. Forget that stuff!! Just record something and see what happens!
I wasn't expecting such a rant. Hopefully some of u understand what i'm getting at.
Do i hate the 00's? No, not in the slightest. More like I despise BOMB, but genuinely enjoy the other 2 albums, however they could've been better. Especially NLOTH.
Great post, Ozeeko. While I actually love the Bomb album, I pretty much agree with your assessment.
Basically, they were Lennon in the 90s and McCartney in the 00s. Both have their good points, but one tends to resonate with people more over time, the other being craftsmanship of the highest level. (Before anyone says, "But Fez is experimental!" -- remember that McCartney is also The Fireman.)
Basically, they were Lennon in the 90s and McCartney in the 00s. Both have their good points, but one tends to resonate with people more over time, the other being craftsmanship of the highest level. (Before anyone says, "But Fez is experimental!" -- remember that McCartney is also The Fireman.)
ZOOTVTOURist
Refugee
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2005
- Messages
- 1,700
You can not compare these decades: Both brought outstanding results, both brought work, that did not convince that much. Both had classic moments, both experimental ones. Then this is very complex: the albums, the tours, the personalities, the looks etc. So the question "Which is better?" does not work. Much more the personal taste ""Wich decade do you prefer?". Arrived at that point, I have so much what I like/what I do not like in both decades, that my answer is: I prefer none.
I embrace both decades (as the 80ies, too ...) and hope for an ambitious new artistic step forward as soon as possible. Because as nearly here everybody knows, I am not too proud of 2009 with NLOTH and its 360 machine, which was far from being U2's best year IMO
I embrace both decades (as the 80ies, too ...) and hope for an ambitious new artistic step forward as soon as possible. Because as nearly here everybody knows, I am not too proud of 2009 with NLOTH and its 360 machine, which was far from being U2's best year IMO
Niceman
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
That doesn't sound right...
Ok, following your rules (which I don't agree with, but ok..): (quick list, probably forgetting a few)
1990s:
Night and Day
Zoo Station
Even Better Than the Real Thing
One
Until the End of The World
Who's Gonna Ride Your Wild Horses
So Cruel
The Fly
Mysterious Ways
Tryin to Throw Your Arms
Ultraviolet
Acrobat
Love is Blindness
Alex Descends..
Satelite of Love
Lady with the spinning head
Where did it all go wrong
Salome
Paint it Black
Fortunate Son
I've Got You Under My Skin
Zooropa
Babyface
Numb
Lemon
Stay
daddy's gonna...
Some Days are Better Than Others
The First Time
Dirty Day
The Wanderer
Hold me, thrill me, kiss me, kill me
Slow dancing
Happiness is a warm gun
north and south of the river
Pop Muzik
Discotheque
Do You Feel Loved?
Mofo
If God Would Send His Angels
Staring at the Sun
Last Night on Earth
Gone
Miami
The Playboy Mansion
If You Wear That Velvet dress
Please
Wake Up Dead Man
Holy Joe
I'm not Your Baby
Two Shots of Happy, One shot of sad
2000s:
Stateless
the Ground Beneath her feet
Beautiful Day
Stuck in a Moment
Elevation
Walk On
Kite
In a Little While
Wild Honey
Peace on Earth
When I look at the world
New York
Grace
Summer rain
Always (I'll count it.)
Levitate
Love You Like Mad
Smile
Flower Child
I Remember You
Big Girls are Best
Don't Take Your Guns to Town
Electrical Storm
Hands that Built America
Vertigo
Miracle Drug
Sometimes You Can't...
Love and Peace
City of Blinding Lights
All Because of You
A Man and A Woman
Crumbs From Your Table
One Step Closer
Original of The Species
Yahweh
fast Cars
Neon Lights
Are you Gonna Wait Forever?
Window in The Skies
Instant Karma
Wave of Sorrow
Angels Too Tied to The Ground
I Believe in Father Christmas
No Line on The Horizon
Magnificent
Moment of Surrender
Unknown Caller
I'll Go Crazy...
Get On Your Boots
Stand Up Comedy
FEZ
White As Snow
Breathe
Cedars of Lebanon
Winter
Disapearing Act
Yoshino Blossom
Wow..... I'm really surprised! Ok... I gotta give it to you. IF we go by YOUR RULES, then they released actually MORE songs in the 00s than the 90s.
Of course, we aren't counting Passengers, any of those Bono duet adventures, Slide Away, In The name of The father, Bono's Million $hotel tracks, etc etc etc and this is a very large heap of material that we aren't counting, which frankly was a very large part of my personal experience of the band in the 1990s.....
BUT if we go by your rules, yes, the 00s had more material.
Still, I still say that u2 in the 1990s beats the u2 of the 2000. Why? For me, it is that heap of material that you don't want to count. These songs make up a big part of my personal experience of the band. They're on the mix tapes I made. Some of the songs got played live!
Ok, following your rules (which I don't agree with, but ok..): (quick list, probably forgetting a few)
1990s:
Night and Day
Zoo Station
Even Better Than the Real Thing
One
Until the End of The World
Who's Gonna Ride Your Wild Horses
So Cruel
The Fly
Mysterious Ways
Tryin to Throw Your Arms
Ultraviolet
Acrobat
Love is Blindness
Alex Descends..
Satelite of Love
Lady with the spinning head
Where did it all go wrong
Salome
Paint it Black
Fortunate Son
I've Got You Under My Skin
Zooropa
Babyface
Numb
Lemon
Stay
daddy's gonna...
Some Days are Better Than Others
The First Time
Dirty Day
The Wanderer
Hold me, thrill me, kiss me, kill me
Slow dancing
Happiness is a warm gun
north and south of the river
Pop Muzik
Discotheque
Do You Feel Loved?
Mofo
If God Would Send His Angels
Staring at the Sun
Last Night on Earth
Gone
Miami
The Playboy Mansion
If You Wear That Velvet dress
Please
Wake Up Dead Man
Holy Joe
I'm not Your Baby
Two Shots of Happy, One shot of sad
2000s:
Stateless
the Ground Beneath her feet
Beautiful Day
Stuck in a Moment
Elevation
Walk On
Kite
In a Little While
Wild Honey
Peace on Earth
When I look at the world
New York
Grace
Summer rain
Always (I'll count it.)
Levitate
Love You Like Mad
Smile
Flower Child
I Remember You
Big Girls are Best
Don't Take Your Guns to Town
Electrical Storm
Hands that Built America
Vertigo
Miracle Drug
Sometimes You Can't...
Love and Peace
City of Blinding Lights
All Because of You
A Man and A Woman
Crumbs From Your Table
One Step Closer
Original of The Species
Yahweh
fast Cars
Neon Lights
Are you Gonna Wait Forever?
Window in The Skies
Instant Karma
Wave of Sorrow
Angels Too Tied to The Ground
I Believe in Father Christmas
No Line on The Horizon
Magnificent
Moment of Surrender
Unknown Caller
I'll Go Crazy...
Get On Your Boots
Stand Up Comedy
FEZ
White As Snow
Breathe
Cedars of Lebanon
Winter
Disapearing Act
Yoshino Blossom
Wow..... I'm really surprised! Ok... I gotta give it to you. IF we go by YOUR RULES, then they released actually MORE songs in the 00s than the 90s.
Of course, we aren't counting Passengers, any of those Bono duet adventures, Slide Away, In The name of The father, Bono's Million $hotel tracks, etc etc etc and this is a very large heap of material that we aren't counting, which frankly was a very large part of my personal experience of the band in the 1990s.....
BUT if we go by your rules, yes, the 00s had more material.
Still, I still say that u2 in the 1990s beats the u2 of the 2000. Why? For me, it is that heap of material that you don't want to count. These songs make up a big part of my personal experience of the band. They're on the mix tapes I made. Some of the songs got played live!
Niceman
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
Note: But I will never agree that demos count as new songs any more than I'll agree remixes do....
Well, I did count "Miss Sarajevo" and the Bono/Sinatra duet in the first stat. (What is "Slide Away"?) No, I don't think we should count Bono & Gavin Friday as "U2" (that is a frickin' great song though!), unless you want to count the Mary J. Blige/Bono song as "U2" (I didn't).
The Million Dollar Hotel soundtrack (and film) came out in early 2000, just 7 months before "Beautiful Day". In any case, even if I added the "Bono + whoever" tracks from it, there are only about 3 more (and they technically belong to the 2000s, not the 90s).
Really, the Million Dollar Hotel soundtrack straddles the space between the two decades, so maybe we shouldnt count it!
Anyway, obviously more songs does not equal "better", but I just wanted to clarify that there are as many songs from the 00s as the 90s (even if you count Passengers, it is not greatly different).
I did not count any demos in the totals.
God Part III
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
I can't conceptually imagine 90's U2 without counting Your Blue Room and Miss Sarajevo. And it seems U2 can't either, as they both feature on the best of 1990-2000.
AndrewCowley
Refugee
I'll do it by simply rating the albums (IMHO of course):
90's: AB = Great. Zooropa = Very good. Pop = Great.
00's: ATYCLB = Good. Bomb = Good. NLOTH = Very good.
So for me the 90's wins with 2 great albums. NLOTH comes close to great and might get there one day but at the moment I only give it a very good.
90's: AB = Great. Zooropa = Very good. Pop = Great.
00's: ATYCLB = Good. Bomb = Good. NLOTH = Very good.
So for me the 90's wins with 2 great albums. NLOTH comes close to great and might get there one day but at the moment I only give it a very good.
phommel
Refugee
The 90s !!!!!
In the ninetees, they truly reinvented themselves!
Achtung baby is a true masterpiece, Zooropa has some great tunes! Then you have Miss Sarajevo, Your Blue Room, HMTMKMKM.
And...POP the most underestimated album of U2. Lyrically at their best. Please, Gone, Wake Up dead Man, Staring At The Sun...
The 00s gave us NLOTH which I consider as the 4th best U2 album, but ATYCLB and HTDAAB gave the hits, but were too mainstream imo.
The 90s win it by far from the 00s
In the ninetees, they truly reinvented themselves!
Achtung baby is a true masterpiece, Zooropa has some great tunes! Then you have Miss Sarajevo, Your Blue Room, HMTMKMKM.
And...POP the most underestimated album of U2. Lyrically at their best. Please, Gone, Wake Up dead Man, Staring At The Sun...
The 00s gave us NLOTH which I consider as the 4th best U2 album, but ATYCLB and HTDAAB gave the hits, but were too mainstream imo.
The 90s win it by far from the 00s
phommel
Refugee
1. The Joshua Tree
2. Achtung Baby
3. POP
4. No Line On The Horizon
5. The Unforgettable Fire
2. Achtung Baby
3. POP
4. No Line On The Horizon
5. The Unforgettable Fire
I already counted both of them in my stats ("Miss Sarajevo" because it was on the Best of 1990-2000, and "Your Blue Room" because it was a U2 B-side.) So, don't worry, your concept is intact.
LemonMelon
More 5G Than Man
90s U2 is better than sex, 00s U2 isn't. How did this make it to four pages?
I think it's fair to not count the rest of Passengers as long as those two are counted.
Fine. Then refer to the 2nd (or 3rd) of the three sets of stats I quoted. In any case, the thread is about which decade you prefer, not whose dad is bigger.
Galeongirl
Galeonbroad
This thread is pure and utter bullshit. Why do we have to compare this stuff?
There is no such thing as better U2. There's no such thing as best song or era. It's all down to personal opinion.
And for the record, I prefer 90s U2 above all. But that doesn't mean 90s U2 is the best thing ever. It is for me, but that doesn't mean it'll be for the next person posting.
There is no such thing as better U2. There's no such thing as best song or era. It's all down to personal opinion.
And for the record, I prefer 90s U2 above all. But that doesn't mean 90s U2 is the best thing ever. It is for me, but that doesn't mean it'll be for the next person posting.
Niceman
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
A couple of thoughts:
If YBR and MS were U2 songs then the whole Passengers album counts as U2. Seems silly to count some songs and not others. How did they end up on the Best-of in the first place if those songs weren't always U2 songs? Or did they become U2 songs 10 years later when they were played live...... Nah, United Colors, Slug, Always Forever Now etc really are obviously U2 songs. That Eno was included in the process isn't anything new and NLOTH should have been the final nail in the idea that Eno makes it not u2....
It changes nothing, but just to respond to your comment that there were just a few other tracks, we aren't counting currently:
United Colors of Plutonium
Slug
Your Blue Room
Always Forever Now
A Different Kind of Blue
Beach Sequence
Miss Sarajevo
Ito Okashi
One Minute Warning
Corpse
Elvis Ate America
Plot 180
Theme From the Swan
Theme From Let's Go native
Viva Davidoff
That's Life
Slide Away (With Michael Hutchence) (Which you should check out - amazing!)
Can't Help Falling in Love
Halleluyah
In The Name of The Father
Billy Boolah
You Made Me The Thief of Your Heart
Goldeneye
New Day
Mission Impossible
(And the Salome outtakes...)
And whatever I'm forgetting....
Again, changes nothing, but there was a lot of material!
If YBR and MS were U2 songs then the whole Passengers album counts as U2. Seems silly to count some songs and not others. How did they end up on the Best-of in the first place if those songs weren't always U2 songs? Or did they become U2 songs 10 years later when they were played live...... Nah, United Colors, Slug, Always Forever Now etc really are obviously U2 songs. That Eno was included in the process isn't anything new and NLOTH should have been the final nail in the idea that Eno makes it not u2....
It changes nothing, but just to respond to your comment that there were just a few other tracks, we aren't counting currently:
United Colors of Plutonium
Slug
Your Blue Room
Always Forever Now
A Different Kind of Blue
Beach Sequence
Miss Sarajevo
Ito Okashi
One Minute Warning
Corpse
Elvis Ate America
Plot 180
Theme From the Swan
Theme From Let's Go native
Viva Davidoff
That's Life
Slide Away (With Michael Hutchence) (Which you should check out - amazing!)
Can't Help Falling in Love
Halleluyah
In The Name of The Father
Billy Boolah
You Made Me The Thief of Your Heart
Goldeneye
New Day
Mission Impossible
(And the Salome outtakes...)
And whatever I'm forgetting....
Again, changes nothing, but there was a lot of material!
el_milagro
War Child
Achutng Baby+Zooropa+Pop = Greatness.
ATYCLB+HTDAAB+NLOTH = Pretty long acronyms.
ATYCLB+HTDAAB+NLOTH = Pretty long acronyms.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Then you're not doing it right...
If you'll refer to my post near the bottom of page 1, you'll see that I listed three sets of stats for song # comparisons -- I put them in bold. The second of them counts all of the Passengers songs.
But as you say, the numbers are interesting but irrelevant to the topic of this thread.
mikal
Blue Crack Addict
i think some people are making this thread too complicated. it's just an opinion thread. which era do you like more?
Niceman
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
Well, as you said, we knew the end result of this thread before it began. The 1990s wins. So really its just the "irrelevant" conversation which we profit by......
And obviously, I included a lot more than Passengers in the songs I listed....
Similar threads
