GEN
Active topics
  1. That's the problem indeed. Well forget about it then
  2. 1. The Joshua Tree
    2. The Unforgettable Fire
    3. How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb
    4. Achtung Baby
    5. All That You Can't leave Behind
    6. War
    7. Zooropa
    8. Pop
    9. October
    10. Boy
    11. Rattle And Hum
  3. Originally posted by Hans23:Zooropa
    ATYCLB
    Pop
    Actung Baby
    Joshua Tree
    HTDAAB
    Rattle and Hum
    War
    TUF
    Boy
    October

    [..]



    Define a U2 standard, I would say Between 1987 and 1993, not sure how you rate over albums around that though, i'm pretty sure it was their most creative era, Album wise and Recording, I don;t think anything they've done since then has really match that.



    I would agree that between 1987 and 1993 was their most successfull creative era.
    While some people would differ, there is a general consensus on music critics and fans on these dates.

    With regards to opinion, there are some people who still believe the Earth is flat, so it works both ways too.
  4. Originally posted by vanquish:[..]

    I would agree that between 1987 and 1993 was their most successfull creative era.
    While some people would differ, there is a general consensus on music critics and fans on these dates.

    It's not about success. Success is album sales, ticket sales, awards etc. Those can all be measured objectively. People's personal preference of albums, however, cannot. If we would set the 1987-1993 era as the standard for best period, and you don't believe that to be the actual best period, then you would have to compare this era with itself. That is ridiculous of course. My point is that you can't objectively try to judge the albums by means of a standard, when the standard itself isn't objective.
    With regards to opinion, there are some people who still believe the Earth is flat, so it works both ways too.

    That is not personal taste: those people probably believe that because they are either overly paranoid, fond of conspiracies, or in shortage of attention (or a combination of these). Anyhow, knock yourself out here: http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php
  5. Originally posted by RDB92:[..]
    It's not about success. Success is album sales, ticket sales, awards etc. Those can all be measured objectively. People's personal preference of albums, however, cannot. If we would set the 1987-1993 era as the standard for best period, and you don't believe that to be the actual best period, then you would have to compare this era with itself. That is ridiculous of course. My point is that you can't objectively try to judge the albums by means of a standard, when the standard itself isn't objective.
    [..]
    That is not personal taste: those people probably believe that because they are either overly paranoid, fond of conspiracies, or in shortage of attention (or a combination of these). Anyhow, knock yourself out here: http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php



    You're right.
  6. Originally posted by RDB92:[..]
    It's not about success. Success is album sales, ticket sales, awards etc. Those can all be measured objectively. People's personal preference of albums, however, cannot. If we would set the 1987-1993 era as the standard for best period, and you don't believe that to be the actual best period, then you would have to compare this era with itself. That is ridiculous of course. My point is that you can't objectively try to judge the albums by means of a standard, when the standard itself isn't objective.
    [..]
    That is not personal taste: those people probably believe that because they are either overly paranoid, fond of conspiracies, or in shortage of attention (or a combination of these). Anyhow, knock yourself out here: http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php



    That's what I meant, that era was when critical acclaim for the band was at its highest, (and is regarded by most fans as their peak).


  7. Funniest website I've ever seen in my whole life. Forever thankful

    But after actually reading some threads I come to the point of assuming this site is created and maintained as a big hoax to attract the weird, the paranoid and the jesters. There might be a handful of true flat earth believers among the members, but I assume most people there just find their fun in discussing the absurd and taking the role of "devils advocates". Some definitely use it as a platform to train their debating abilities - with amazing results and conclusions. This is too far out to be true - but definitely worth a visit.

    Alex
  8. Originally posted by Alex:[..]
    Funniest website I've ever seen in my whole life. Forever thankful

    But after actually reading some threads I come to the point of assuming this site is created and maintained as a big hoax to attract the weird, the paranoid and the jesters. There might be a handful of true flat earth believers among the members, but I assume most people there just find their fun in discussing the absurd and taking the role of "devils advocates". Some definitely use it as a platform to train their debating abilities - with amazing results and conclusions. This is too far out to be true - but definitely worth a visit.

    Alex


    The majority probably doesn't actually believe in a flat earth indeed, because they are smart enough to debate. Some of them however deny every little piece of evidence of a round earth without any sense of reason. They're probably hoaxers as well, but it's still very funny to read the alternative theories of things everyone knows (e.g. Antarctica = a giant ice wall, gravity = earth moving upwards). Fits right in with the theory of the lizard people.
  9. Originally posted by vanquish:I cannot understand why Boy is being ranked higher than Zooropa.
    I understand people are being sentimental, but come on.

    Zooropa while not perfect, was a great experimental album that produced some truly innovative, standout songs
    eg. Stay, Lemon, Zooropa, The Wanderer, Numb.

    Boy was a debut album made by a bunch of 18 year olds with an inexperienced producer, Zooropa was made by a band at their prime with one of the all time producing greats.

    Putting Boy in front of Zooropa doesn't add up to me.


    To each his own!! I have to skip songs while Im listening to Zooropa. FOR MY PERSONAL TASTE I dont have to skip when Im listening to BOY.
  10. It's very odd to me how low many of you put "War" on your list. It's their most explosive, most political, album, closest to the visceral, punk rock energy of The Clash, the culmination of their early period and their first breakthrough (it went to #11, I believe, on the U.S. charts). Of course, I started listening to U2 in 1983, so maybe its affection for the first U2 sound I first encountered. But War has 3 definite U2 classics, Sunday Bloody Sunday, New Year's Day, and 40. Songs about violence in Ireland, the Polish solidarity movement, and spiritual yearning and redemption (based on the 40th psalm). This is the album where U2 came into its own, more so even than Joshua Tree, which is garnered more commercial success. And then there's Seconds, about nuclear holocaust, Drowning Man, Surrender, Two Hearts Beat As One, Like a Song. There's not a dud on the whole album. I know quite a few people who think U2 went downhill after War and sold out. I don't agree, but it's strange to rank "War" near the bottom of the list. I would rank U2 albums in the following order, and am hoping NLOTH is at least in the A and maybe A+ category:

    1. A+ = Joshua Tree, Achtung Baby
    3. A = War, All That You Can't Leave Behind
    5. A- = Pop, How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb, The Unforgettable Fire
    8. B+ = Boy, October, Rattle and Hum, Zooropa
  11. djrlewis who started this thread used the rating for each individual song and got the average, which is obviously one way of doing it. It seems to me that everyone uses their own method, which makes me ask some questions.

    Are we discussing the albums as pieces of art or as collections of songs/ideas? I think that those can be two very different things.

    * If we're discussing the studio albums as such, things like the mixing and also the order of the songs matter.
    * If we're talking about collections of songs, live versions might be more important than the studio versions to some people.

    In my attempt to rank the albums I try to see the albums as pieces of art, because I think that was the task. But I cannot totally disregard other things, because live performances, videos etc have certainly made me reconsider some of the songs, resulting in a different experience while listening to the studio versions.

    Are we discussing which albums we like the best, for whatever reason, or which albums are most important in music history, or in U2's history for that matter? Or come with a message?

    In my ranking below I don't really care about how important the albums were, whether they had a huge impact or defined U2 in any way. All this probably affects my ratings indirectly, but I have not intentionally taking any of that into account.

    So, here we go (studio albums only):

    1. All That You Can't Leave Behind, How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb
    3. Achtung Baby
    4. The Joshua Tree, Rattle & Hum
    6. Zooropa, Pop
    8. War, The Unforgettable Fire
    10. Boy
    11. October

    My first impression of NLOTH is that it might take first place or at least join ATYCLB and HTDAAB at the top. Very, very promising!

    /Lena

    PS If anyone wonders, I care very little about lyrics, unfortunately. Often for me, the sounds of the words mostly carry the music.
  12. 1: Zooropa, Achtung Baby, All That You Can't Leave Behind and No Line On The Horizon (no particular order)
    2: The Joshua Tree & Pop
    3: Rattle And Hum, How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb & The Unforgettable Fire
    4: Boy & War
    5: October
U2start is run by fans for fans. Help us reduce personal costs. Consider to make a donation to support us.
U2start is run by fans for fans. Help us reduce personal costs. Consider to make a donation to support us.
U2start is run by fans for fans. Help us reduce personal costs. Consider to make a donation to support us.
U2start is run by fans for fans. Help us reduce personal costs. Consider to make a donation to support us.