Originally posted by bartajax:[..]
Put my opinion aside about the album, but an evolution?
JH/RH>>AB sounded like a totally different band, also the difference between Pop and ATYCLB was huge, while the difference between NLOTH and SOI music wise isn't really big imo. SOI sounds a lot like their work in the last 14 years, only better than the previous 3 albums.
Originally posted by ahn1991:[..]
It's an evolution in the sense that SOI is perhaps U2's only album that actually feels like a complete album. Every song has its proper place and it flows very well musically and thematically. NLOTH (along with almost every other album except maybe ATYCLB) felt more like a collection of songs that are loosely associated with each other. NLOTH was a very odd album. If you took it out of the U2 discography, one could argue that SOI was a natural progression from HTDAAB.
Originally posted by CMIPalaeo:One of their classics. Almost certainly the best album since Achtung Baby, easily their best of the 21st century... and this is coming from someone who absolutely, totally adores HTDAAB, Pop, and NLOTH -- I like them better than The Joshua Tree -- and thinks very highly of Zooropa as well.
In two decades, I legitimately think that SOI, AB, and TJT are the U2 albums everyone remembers and loves.
Originally posted by patou2:[..]
no way that SOI be in the same step than JT and AB. Maybe was the best album form last years but is far from those. anyway i think it was a very good album but i don t think that have big songs like ATYCLB , HTDAB or NLOTH
Originally posted by AidanFormigoni:2 months after its release, I'd say it's a good album, but not their best work. I can't rank it yet, but surely it's not at the same level as JT, AB and ATYCLB in my opinion.