In Defence of HTDAAB, and in Offence of ATYCLB...

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Also, the comment earlier about U2 leaving you hanging on the edge of a cliff is totally true. They used to be masters of letting you know what you want from a song, but never quite giving it to you. Whether that’s literally in the music or in something about the mood or emotion. They either wouldn’t hand it to you, or they’d just give you a just a little bit here and there. Like With or Without You never exploding. Where the Streets Have no Name is pure elation, but it could also have been taken to another level if they wanted to, just blown the thing out. One never clears it’s throat to become a big anthem. The Fly never gives you time to savour it as a super killer riff rock song, it just gets more and more chaotic and then just spits you out. Think about almost every single song from the 80s and 90s. None of them really, truly, give you what you want from them. They just wink it at you and then pull it away, and that's the magic.

That’s a difference with U2 on Atomic Bomb. They are beating you over the head with all the bits you used to want, and I think a lot of people have come to understand that the magic was in them just giving you a glimpse and taking it away again, over and over and over, rather than milking those moments, over and over and over again. That’s why you can keep going back to the great U2 songs decades later and still not be satisfied, whereas a lot of people were bored with the Bomb within a matter of weeks.

I also think it's exactly where bands who mimic U2 have forever gotten it wrong.

I nominate this for "Most Sensible Post in EYKIW of the Year". And yes, I know 2009 only just began.
 
Just thinking about it further, a couple of things...
Think about With or Without You, if it were written Bomb style. I imagine it would have come out sounding like Miracle Drug. With or Without You stays low, stays calm. Miracle Drug starts out that way, but BOOM! within not 30 seconds we're off "THE SONGS ARE IN..." etc. At the end, With or Without You, having not yet exploded, just backs quietly out of the room. Miracle Drug winds itself down too. Here is where you are left wanting from With or Without You. You want Edge to launch, and Bono to give it a belting finale, but they don't do it. Miracle Drug? BOOM! Off they go.

Miracle Drug is nothing like With Or Without You and I have no doubt that there was no intention for either of them to be at all alike, so what is the point of that comparison? Just to add, With Or Without You does explode during Bono's cries of "OHHH", even in the video when his veins are popping out and his mouth is gaping open, that's supposed to be the dramatic climax part of the song, it doesn't just stay subdued the entire track. As for MD, I'm guessing it was meant to be a song like... well... Miracle Drug, and that's it. What they wanted to accomplish with that song, they felt they did, or it would have been scrapped.

To address the whole dialing it in debate other people claim. I mean do some really think they go into the studio and run down a list of their hits to try and replicate them? Their music has changed over the years and they don't make songs with the hopes that they will be like their previous work, they want to surpass their previous work, otherwise why still be in the business if you're only there to be a caricature of yourself? Bono is always repeating that line about how they feel they haven't made their best work yet. So just because Joe Schmoe may not enjoy what they have put out over the past couple of years, doesn't mean they must be not trying hard enough, it just means they didn't make music Joe likes. I don't really get where the whole "dialing it in" stuff comes from anyway, especially when there are just as many songs on ATYCLB that sound like typical U2 fare (more in my opinion) as there are on HTDAAB. I'm willing to not be cynical and believe that a band with as much history, acclaim, and money as U2 would not be continuing to do what they love without giving 100% every time.
 
I dislike Bomb for a few key reasons:

Bono's lyrics: No real sarcasm, no real irony, no imagery (ie. opera in my head and stuff like that) - a little self-indulgent to boot.

The production: Too loud, and too many annoying backing tracks. The album was better live.

The style: The //// - target - red/black look was just not doing it for me.

The songs: From Bomb, I like Vertigo most, then COBL, then Crumbs, then Fast Cars. The rest I always skip. I don't care for any other song on the album.

- But I like the theme about innocence and losing it and looking back and regaining the feeling. A great theme, actually, and I like that I can find it on each song. And Vertigo really, really rocks. And the Vertigo tour was amazing.
 
I'm noticing a strange trend on these boards. All of a sudden everyone is extremely critical of How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb and talking about All That You Can't Leave Behind as if it was a masterpiece.

Did I miss something?

All That You Can't Leave Behind was (In my opinion) a mess! Yes, it had Beautiful Day. It also had Stuck in a Moment, Kite, In a Little While, and Wild Honey. Those are all good songs.
BUT it also had Elevation, Walk On, Peace On Earth. When I Look at the World, New York, and Grace; NONE of which had any right being on a U2 album! (Elevation became much better live, but the album version doesn't cut it for me. It wasn't good enough to be a U2 A-side as it stood.)
So, 5 songs makes a third masterpiece!?!?
(Some countries also had The Ground Beneath her Feet as a bonus track, but this had already been released on the Million Dollar Hotel soundtrack. It wasn't new or even a new version.)
(I'll also heap MASSIVE praise upon the B-side Summer Rain. Best lyrics of the era, but U2 didn't put it on the album...)

Now, How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb had Vertigo, Miracle Drug, Sometimes You Can't Make it On Your Own, Love and Peace or Else, City of Blinding Lights, All Because of You, A Man and A Woman, Crumbs From Your Table, One Step Closer, Original of The Species, and Yahweh, and Fast Cars (In some countries). (As well as the leaked Mercy.) These were ALL good songs! (In my opinion.) Could they have been recorded and produced better? I think so. I'll also criticize the album for not being a cohesive album, but rather a collection of the best songs they happened to write 2001-2004. But 11-13 wonderful songs released imperfectly do not a crap record make!

So, what do you guys think? Is it just a need to trash the most recent in favor of what might be coming, and an over-romanticizing of what was 8 years ago? Am I wrong? Were New York and Peace On Earth masterpieces and I just don't get it????

Maybe in 4 years it will be popular to like HTDAAB again....

I think your last line has a ring of truth to it, people often get nostalgic for an album after years of disliking it.
I'm not a big fan of either really, both have some excellent songs but the albums themselves don't do much for me. I don't hate them by any means but I don't love them either.
 
I'm a fan of both, but Bomb is the more consistent song-for-song collection (which is where they've been with the last 3 records anyway). Otherwise similar themes and down to earth, direct lyrics on both of them. Straightfoward songwriting / hunt for the perfect single was the goal.

The only difference is ATYCLB, thanks to Eno/Lanois, retains a kind of unifying mood and warmth (which was always less likely with the army of producers on Bomb). That said it also tanks quality wise after IALW.

edit: It's interesting that, despite the flack the era gets, 00's - if NLOTH impressions are anything to go by - just may be the first decade with universally critically acclaimed albums.
 
A long time ago, I was listening to an interview with KRS-One of Boogie-Down Productions fame, where he was giving advice to modern rappers on how to create a memorable rap song.

He said, "mood".

You can have lyrics, you ran rhyme, you can flow, you can have thick beats, all of those things.. but if your song has no mood to it, it won't be memorable, won't be good.

(and he would know - listen to 'Love's Gonna Getcha' and you'll see what he means.)

U2's a band that lives off mood - or emotion, I'd say. Most of their songs have a mood to them, a certain feeling, and most are infused with an strong emotional content.

But what usually makes an entire album an overall hit or miss is the ability to inflect that mood, that overriding emotional appeal, across all the songs, all the lyrics, the photography, the tour, the media.

It's no easy trick when each song by necessity has to be different. How do you take an album that had odes to life and perseverence, laments over lost life, struggles with mid-life crisis and doubt, pleas to fading fans, whimsical melodies about hangovers, girls, and moles, bitter diatribes over faith and war..how do blanket that with a consistent mood?

ATYCLB managed to do it.

Whether or not you like each and every song, you have to admit that each and every song feels like it fits on that album. That combined, they tell a story about holding onto the the good things in your life while letting go of the baggage. Of realizing that admitting your faults shows more strength than drenching yourself in bravado and denying your humanity.

That maybe by letting go, you can hold on.. to your music, your wife, your kids, and more importantly, all those fans that the hubub surrounding Pop may have scared away.

Bomb failed to tell a story, although the theme was supposed to be 'coming full circle'. It has some great tracks, and was a little like 'ATYCLB on steroids' - when you realize that steroids may make you bigger, but not necessarily better. It was more of an oak tree than Behind, with the latter being a willow - but we know which of those lasts better through a storm.

This is an incredible post. This is the type of post that makes me better understand my own feelings about the album. Thank you.

I listened to ATYCLB straight through with headphones yesterday, and I was really impressed. It has a soul and pulse to it that HTDAAB just can't muster. Bono's voice sounds like it is going to break--permanently--at a few points, and I think that this desperation combined with the raggedness of his vocals on that album is extraordinarily compelling. Also, I think ATYCLB really splits the fandom based on what people think of its second half. I find WILATW and New York in particular to be U2 gems. I've never understood the beating New York takes among fans--listening to it on headphones really blew me away; I love Edge's subtle guitar work pre-chorus. Grace is another berated track that, in my opinion, works perfectly as the closer of the album. It doesn't try hard to be much of anything beyond a mood-setter, but this works to give the album that additional character that HTDAAB lacks.
 
This is an incredible post. This is the type of post that makes me better understand my own feelings about the album. Thank you.

I listened to ATYCLB straight through with headphones yesterday, and I was really impressed. It has a soul and pulse to it that HTDAAB just can't muster. Bono's voice sounds like it is going to break--permanently--at a few points, and I think that this desperation combined with the raggedness of his vocals on that album is extraordinarily compelling. Also, I think ATYCLB really splits the fandom based on what people think of its second half. I find WILATW and New York in particular to be U2 gems. I've never understood the beating New York takes among fans--listening to it on headphones really blew me away; I love Edge's subtle guitar work pre-chorus. Grace is another berated track that, in my opinion, works perfectly as the closer of the album. It doesn't try hard to be much of anything beyond a mood-setter, but this works to give the album that additional character that HTDAAB lacks.

That's a good point, regarding Bono's fragile voice on ATYCLB, and illustrates another difference between that album and Bomb.

In ABOY, Bono states, "I'm not broke but you can see the cracks", and that sums up the difference between the two albums, at least for me.

Writing, writing almost anything, is the art of showing and not telling.

All throught ATYCLB, you can hear Bono's voice on the verge of shattering each song. AB may have been his most emotionally revealing album, and Pop showed him struggling with doubt, but only on the 2000 Album do you really see the singer fully vulnerable. That waver in his voice mirrored the band's humble 'reapplication' to its fans (as reflected in Kite's 'last of the rock stars' verse), the reality of his INXS cohort's death, and ultimately the vulnerability of America, and all the free world post-911.

It was all on display, tempered by hope, without ever having to state it as explicitly as "I'm not broke...".

I don't hold it against Bomb, really.. that was meant to be a blunt album. Hiroshima was not a subtle operation, but a huge blow to the enemy meant to be viewed outright by the whole world. And so was HTDAAB - a big album with bold statements that pulled in huge numbers, ticket sales, and Grammys.

But in my opinion, it's the subtlety, cohesiveness, and 'show not tell' of ATYCLB that makes it the 'better' of the two, at least for me.

And to those people who say that it's U2's talent for always leaving you wanting more, I think that's dead-on. You can loop ATYCLB a few times without feeling full. Bomb starts with a thick soup, moves into a meaty main course, and finishes with a sticky, sweet desert. When it's done, you're done.

I prefer my U2 a little more hungry. :)
 
That's a good point, regarding Bono's fragile voice on ATYCLB, and illustrates another difference between that album and Bomb.

In ABOY, Bono states, "I'm not broke but you can see the cracks", and that sums up the difference between the two albums, at least for me.

Writing, writing almost anything, is the art of showing and not telling.

All throught ATYCLB, you can hear Bono's voice on the verge of shattering each song. AB may have been his most emotionally revealing album, and Pop showed him struggling with doubt, but only on the 2000 Album do you really see the singer fully vulnerable. That waver in his voice mirrored the band's humble 'reapplication' to its fans (as reflected in Kite's 'last of the rock stars' verse), the reality of his INXS cohort's death, and ultimately the vulnerability of America, and all the free world post-911.

It was all on display, tempered by hope, without ever having to state it as explicitly as "I'm not broke...".

I don't hold it against Bomb, really.. that was meant to be a blunt album. Hiroshima was not a subtle operation, but a huge blow to the enemy meant to be viewed outright by the whole world. And so was HTDAAB - a big album with bold statements that pulled in huge numbers, ticket sales, and Grammys.

But in my opinion, it's the subtlety, cohesiveness, and 'show not tell' of ATYCLB that makes it the 'better' of the two, at least for me.

And to those people who say that it's U2's talent for always leaving you wanting more, I think that's dead-on. You can loop ATYCLB a few times without feeling full. Bomb starts with a thick soup, moves into a meaty main course, and finishes with a sticky, sweet desert. When it's done, you're done.

I prefer my U2 a little more hungry. :)

Your last point is right on. While probably not in my top 3 U2 albums, I became a fan on ATYCLB. I bought it on its release day after hearing my high school buddies talk about it, and I listened to it back-to-back-to-back-to-back (4 times, no stops) that night in 2000. I wasn't blown away, but there was something that kept making me play it again. I played that album a lot for the next year, and last night I realized that I still can enjoy listening to it straight through. I've probably listened to bomb something like 5 times less as an album, and despite that fact and its relative newness, I practically have to force myself to listen to it all the way through. And I actually like each of the songs, more or less. But I definitely feel "full" afterward and I know that I won't be revisiting it any time soon.

Regarding Bono's vocals: Considering the context of where U2 were when making that album, the fit is absolutely perfect. They were a bit broken down and unsure of themselves and you can really hear that in Bono's approach (as opposed to his more brash and technically better vocals on Bomb). You really get the sense that it was a make or break moment for U2--it didn't matter if Bono's vocals completely gave out during recording because if they delivered a record that didn't connect with people, they were done anyway. I think there was a greater sense of urgency in recording that album than people generally give them credit for. In terms of the need to change to ultimately achieve success, it was very reminiscent of Achtung Baby.

Regardless of what anyone feels about the album personally, I think that it would be hard to argue that ATYCLB was anything less than an essential U2 album--it gave them a lease on life that no other bands have been able to grasp.
 
I do enjoy HTDAAB more than ATYCLB but ATYCLB sounds more like an album by far. Cohesive, has a soul, and does create a "mood" that reflects one losing things in life & learning to let them go.

The process for U2 recording new material I think relies heavily on previous material. U2 is a band who never tries to repeat itself & there is always a sense of freshness to the material. ATYCLB was made based on going back to basics and staying away from the the 90's (AB, ZOO, POP). They wanted to make a sound of all 4 playing in a studio. The direction was set and accomplished.

With HTDAAB I really don't think the band knew what they wanted. They had an idea with Chris Thomas and I think it was something different but I didn't work. This is what prompted them to bring in Lillywhite to fix the mess and get an album out. I don't know about you guys but I was really confused with the band on HTDAAB when they talked about it. Bono was saying one thing but it didn't make much sense. I think U2 wanted to build off of ATYCLB & rock harder. The whole punk rock from Venus brought us Vertigo & maybe Fast Cars, but the rest of the album doesn't go with these songs.

To me ATYCLB is a better cohesive effort to me but just falls apart after IALW. We never get back on track of what U2 started which was a strong A-side. With HTDAAB the album never hits stride (creating a mood for what the album is about) till Crumbs thru Yahweh.
 
I like both albums. But, ATYCLB is a little more special to me because it was released at a special time in my life. So, the connection with the music and the memories I have is something that I will never forget. HTDAAB had some really great songs, but like some of you have said, the 'loudness' factor can sometimes make you feel like your ears are going to bleed. Well ok not bleed, but they just get tired easily. Also, I consider HTDAAB a lot darker in mood than ATYCLB as it seems to deal with a lot of more issues than ATYCLB. ATYCLB was about soul well and truly (no wonder Bono loved to chant soul after some songs) and HTDAAB is about loss, love, relationships, political stuff in approaching a new age - well atleast it comes across that way to me.
 
I don't mind the ATYCLB songs that get the most criticism - Wild Honey, In A Little While, When I Look At The World, Grace, New York, Peace On Earth - they are not classic songs but they don't try to be, unlike every song on Bomb which tries way too hard.
 
wow this is a great thread. some great analysis in here.

I agree with the fact that ATYCLB is the superior album due to the soul. watching it be performed live on the Slane DVD it all kind of came together at the end when Walk On was playing and Bono went through the "All that you build, all that you break" all this you CAN leave behind verses before the love suitcase was projected over the screen. The album has a clear message of dealing with loss and what we take with us when we go. Cohesive message and excellent song work as well.
 
Also, the comment earlier about U2 leaving you hanging on the edge of a cliff is totally true. They used to be masters of letting you know what you want from a song, but never quite giving it to you. Whether that’s literally in the music or in something about the mood or emotion. They either wouldn’t hand it to you, or they’d just give you a just a little bit here and there. Like With or Without You never exploding. Where the Streets Have no Name is pure elation, but it could also have been taken to another level if they wanted to, just blown the thing out. One never clears it’s throat to become a big anthem. The Fly never gives you time to savour it as a super killer riff rock song, it just gets more and more chaotic and then just spits you out. Think about almost every single song from the 80s and 90s. None of them really, truly, give you what you want from them. They just wink it at you and then pull it away, and that's the magic.

That’s a difference with U2 on Atomic Bomb. They are beating you over the head with all the bits you used to want, and I think a lot of people have come to understand that the magic was in them just giving you a glimpse and taking it away again, over and over and over, rather than milking those moments, over and over and over again. That’s why you can keep going back to the great U2 songs decades later and still not be satisfied, whereas a lot of people were bored with the Bomb within a matter of weeks.

I also think it's exactly where bands who mimic U2 have forever gotten it wrong.

Let me use a smilie I have NEVER used before:

:bow:
 
Also, the comment earlier about U2 leaving you hanging on the edge of a cliff is totally true. They used to be masters of letting you know what you want from a song, but never quite giving it to you. Whether that’s literally in the music or in something about the mood or emotion. They either wouldn’t hand it to you, or they’d just give you a just a little bit here and there. Like With or Without You never exploding. Where the Streets Have no Name is pure elation, but it could also have been taken to another level if they wanted to, just blown the thing out. One never clears it’s throat to become a big anthem. The Fly never gives you time to savour it as a super killer riff rock song, it just gets more and more chaotic and then just spits you out. Think about almost every single song from the 80s and 90s. None of them really, truly, give you what you want from them. They just wink it at you and then pull it away, and that's the magic.

That’s a difference with U2 on Atomic Bomb. They are beating you over the head with all the bits you used to want, and I think a lot of people have come to understand that the magic was in them just giving you a glimpse and taking it away again, over and over and over, rather than milking those moments, over and over and over again. That’s why you can keep going back to the great U2 songs decades later and still not be satisfied, whereas a lot of people were bored with the Bomb within a matter of weeks.

I also think it's exactly where bands who mimic U2 have forever gotten it wrong.

I don't know if this is right or even if I agree, but I think this post deserves it's own thread. There's several really interesting thoughts here that deserve some discussion.
Congratulations, Mr. (I guess) Shavers
 
I'm noticing a strange trend on these boards. All of a sudden everyone is extremely critical of How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb and talking about All That You Can't Leave Behind as if it was a masterpiece.

Did I miss something?

All That You Can't Leave Behind was (In my opinion) a mess! Yes, it had Beautiful Day. It also had Stuck in a Moment, Kite, In a Little While, and Wild Honey. Those are all good songs.
BUT it also had Elevation, Walk On, Peace On Earth. When I Look at the World, New York, and Grace; NONE of which had any right being on a U2 album! (Elevation became much better live, but the album version doesn't cut it for me. It wasn't good enough to be a U2 A-side as it stood.)
So, 5 songs makes a third masterpiece!?!?
(Some countries also had The Ground Beneath her Feet as a bonus track, but this had already been released on the Million Dollar Hotel soundtrack. It wasn't new or even a new version.)
(I'll also heap MASSIVE praise upon the B-side Summer Rain. Best lyrics of the era, but U2 didn't put it on the album...)

Now, How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb had Vertigo, Miracle Drug, Sometimes You Can't Make it On Your Own, Love and Peace or Else, City of Blinding Lights, All Because of You, A Man and A Woman, Crumbs From Your Table, One Step Closer, Original of The Species, and Yahweh, and Fast Cars (In some countries). (As well as the leaked Mercy.) These were ALL good songs! (In my opinion.) Could they have been recorded and produced better? I think so. I'll also criticize the album for not being a cohesive album, but rather a collection of the best songs they happened to write 2001-2004. But 11-13 wonderful songs released imperfectly do not a crap record make!

So, what do you guys think? Is it just a need to trash the most recent in favor of what might be coming, and an over-romanticizing of what was 8 years ago? Am I wrong? Were New York and Peace On Earth masterpieces and I just don't get it????

Maybe in 4 years it will be popular to like HTDAAB again....

You know how I feel! I believe that When I Look At The World and Man And A Woman are they only songs off of the last two that feel like U2 songs, sonically and lyrically. They both have Edge parts that we have not heard before. Bono does a good job of singing them and they have a soul. They are mature songs. It's the closest we've gotten to classic U2.
 
I think there are three reasons why this is:

1. The terrible production on Bomb.

2. The songs on Bomb were so much better live that the album production is even more disappointing.

3. People can see what Bomb could have been with Fast Cars, Smile, Native Son and Mercy. Seeing what was left off will always hurt Bomb in the minds of a lot of fans.
 
:no:
Also, the comment earlier about U2 leaving you hanging on the edge of a cliff is totally true. They used to be masters of letting you know what you want from a song, but never quite giving it to you. Whether that’s literally in the music or in something about the mood or emotion. They either wouldn’t hand it to you, or they’d just give you a just a little bit here and there. Like With or Without You never exploding. Where the Streets Have no Name is pure elation, but it could also have been taken to another level if they wanted to, just blown the thing out. One never clears it’s throat to become a big anthem. The Fly never gives you time to savour it as a super killer riff rock song, it just gets more and more chaotic and then just spits you out. Think about almost every single song from the 80s and 90s. None of them really, truly, give you what you want from them. They just wink it at you and then pull it away, and that's the magic.

That’s a difference with U2 on Atomic Bomb. They are beating you over the head with all the bits you used to want, and I think a lot of people have come to understand that the magic was in them just giving you a glimpse and taking it away again, over and over and over, rather than milking those moments, over and over and over again. That’s why you can keep going back to the great U2 songs decades later and still not be satisfied, whereas a lot of people were bored with the Bomb within a matter of weeks.

I also think it's exactly where bands who mimic U2 have forever gotten it wrong.

WHAT? Are you serious? With Or Without you never exploding? The vocals towards the end of the song are thunderous. The song totally crescendoes with Bono.

Streets not going to another level? The song is a powerhouse. There is nowhere left for it to go because it's already punched through the roof.

The Fly is a killer rock riff. It's badass song. It's savory every time I listen to it. It's totally satisfying.

What are you talking about the 80's and 90's stuff? None give you what you want from them? :doh: Are you going to tell me songs like I still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For, Drowning Man, Another Time Another Place, Stay, Surrender, Exit, Running To Stand Still, BAD, A SORT OR HOMECOMING, GLORIA, Twilight, Red Light, I THREW A BRICK, and EVERYTHING ELSE from that time doesn't satisfy you????? You feel like they are teasing you with the songs?!?!?!?!? This is the most rediculous thing I have ever heard. Seriously.
 
:no:

WHAT? Are you serious? With Or Without you never exploding? The vocals towards the end of the song are thunderous. The song totally crescendoes with Bono.

Streets not going to another level? The song is a powerhouse. There is nowhere left for it to go because it's already punched through the roof.

The Fly is a killer rock riff. It's badass song. It's savory every time I listen to it. It's totally satisfying.

What are you talking about the 80's and 90's stuff? None give you what you want from them? :doh: Are you going to tell me songs like I still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For, Drowning Man, Another Time Another Place, Stay, Surrender, Exit, Running To Stand Still, BAD, A SORT OR HOMECOMING, GLORIA, Twilight, Red Light, I THREW A BRICK, and EVERYTHING ELSE from that time doesn't satisfy you????? You feel like they are teasing you with the songs?!?!?!?!? This is the most rediculous thing I have ever heard. Seriously.

:lol:
 
How many songs on HTDAAB were leftovers from ATYCLB. I just know COBL was a leftover from Pop.
 
ATYCLB had some great "moody" songs (and hey, Walk On is a awesome song). There's always songs which you won't like (JT had three songs I didn't like, and it's still my favorite album of all time), and ATYCLB is no difference. But it's still a great album. I think 00 U2 has been good in general, with two (for me) stellar albums with hopefully a even better album coming up.
 
Also, the comment earlier about U2 leaving you hanging on the edge of a cliff is totally true. They used to be masters of letting you know what you want from a song, but never quite giving it to you. Whether that’s literally in the music or in something about the mood or emotion. They either wouldn’t hand it to you, or they’d just give you a just a little bit here and there.
I really think only Unforgettable Fire and Joshua Tree fit this description

from Rattle & Hum on onwards the intro / first 5 seconds of the song give away the mood of the entire song (there probably are some exceptions)


love All that you can't ....
it's an album I feel a connection to

I don't feel that connection with Bomb
but it's the 1 U2 album that's actually growing on me
 
I know.

:no:

WHAT? Are you serious? With Or Without you never exploding? The vocals towards the end of the song are thunderous. The song totally crescendoes with Bono.

Streets not going to another level? The song is a powerhouse. There is nowhere left for it to go because it's already punched through the roof.

The Fly is a killer rock riff. It's badass song. It's savory every time I listen to it. It's totally satisfying.

I'm liking the MD/WOWY comparison best.
 
I'm noticing a strange trend on these boards. All of a sudden everyone is extremely critical of How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb and talking about All That You Can't Leave Behind as if it was a masterpiece.

Did I miss something?

As you said its a 'trend'

Its 'trendy' to slag off the last album.....absolutely pathetic IMO.


BsB
 
I much prefer HTDAAB. As has been said may times before ATYCLB really tails off badly. Quite frankly I'm shocked that U2 were happy to release that album with such a bad 2nd half given there was no time pressure on them.

HTDAAB is much more consistent throughout IMO.
 
Neither ATYCLB nor HTDAAB stand up to Achtung Baby or even The Joshua Tree (great but a tad overrated in my view). The problem was that like a lot of bands in their middle age, they started looking back to move forward. I don't mind a little bit of that- retrenchment was probably required after Pop (outstanding as that album was) and it was nice to hear some chiming guitar again, but they went too far so many of the songs like pastiches of their old work- especially on the Bomb, which didn't have the sonic twists that just about kept ATYCLB interesting and vital.

Does this make ATYCLB the better album? Yes- although it is not the only factor at work. Bono's lyrics were better for a start (though poor in relation to his nineties work)- New York and Kite were especially poetic. His verses on The Bomb were vague, lazy and clumsy- perhaps only on One Step Closer does he write with any skill.

Also, the melodies on ATYCLB were often quite beautiful- "Stuck In A Moment" and "Wild Honey" come to mind- intricate, pleasing pieces which were great to hum along to. HTDAAB had a lot of generic stuff- only A Man And A Woman and Vertigo interested me melodically. It wasn't just the production that was the issue- it was the songs themselves that lacked bite.

The caveat is that Bono's voice was stronger on the latter album- nowhere near as good as in the Zoo Tv era, that came in late 2006, but still much improved. Nevertheless, I must disagree with the original poster and plump for ATYCLB.
 
ATYCLB has some great songs on it.

-Beautiful Day. Great modern day U2 song. Very U2.

-Elevation. A true electro rocker.

-Walk On. Another great song. Even better live.

-Stuck in a moment. Good song. Not great.

-In a little while. Nice, quiet, comforting song.

-Kite. Another great song.

-When I look at the world. Probably one of my favourite U2 songs. I think this album was responsible for creating the whole mood of that album.

-Wild Honey. Definitely a good song. Very catchy.

-Peace on Earth. Not the biggest song; probably a very quiet song acting as sort of a humble filler.

-New York. What a song? very heavy electro rocker.

-Grace. Meh.

HTDAAB on the other hand:

Vertigo: A good catchy song at first, but probably not the most memorable. Now it doesn't rank too high on my U2 songs I like list.
ABOY: Like Vertigo was catchy at first but then died down a bit. Great guitar solo though.
COBL: A true classic. A song which perfectly represents the band's style over the last 30 years. Cold, calm, relaxed, chilly, blue, atmospheric, blissful. It had it all.
Sometimes: A good song. IMO it was way too dragged on. Took a while for the song to kick into motion.
Miracle Drug: Beautiful song. Great song and should have been a single.
LAPOE: Sort of the 'bullet the blue sky' of this album musically speaking. Very raw, visceral, and rock n roll. Great guitar solo. Excellent live.
AMAW: Had totally forgotten about this song. Had to look it up. Listening to it after such a long time - sounds like a new song now :p. A very grown up song. Great bass to it. Probably one of the more overlooked songs.
CRUMBS: Good song.
Original: Typical U2. Cold chilly.
One step: Peace on earth of this album. Next.
Yahweh: Creates the mood for THIS album. Excellent ending to a great album.

I look at these two albums as siblings. ATYCLB was part 1, HTDAAB was part 2.

I found a good link to a thread with a similar topic: HTDAAB/ATYCLB THEORY
 
Back
Top Bottom