Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
People are certainly allowed to say wrong things like the bolded, but it doesn't mean you would have to validate those types of comments.
580??? #### that. Trying to rank the 85 remixes of Lemon, I would prefer waterboarding.
Yes. Thank you. Asking for feedback has given me a few I would have otherwise missedI say include whatever songs you want to, opinions about it be damned. It's your list.
Wow. Good stuff. I am posting my final list of 229 songs next, in alphabetical order. Rankings to come. If you rank them all, send it to me on PM and we will discuss further. You will be given 50% weight, 33% if we get another and so on. Except for the song I have ranked #229. Mine. No sharing
Maybe post release or as I mention a song throw your ranking in.
Good catch on I’m not your Baby. We are down to 228.
I don’t have the time to create my own list but am anxiously awaiting yours. As a result, my request for further clarification on this point (I raised it originally) is I’m sure both unnecessary and annoying. But with respect to the list, you have the albums listed next to the song. So I would presume that we’re talking about the song as it appeared on that album. Well, Bad was released on two different albums and to me, the Wide Awake version is superior. So by listing UF next to Bad are you saying that we’re ranking that studio version, but can bump it up our own list if there are other versions we enjoy more? Or is the list simply of the songs (in whatever iteration) and the album references are not relevant at all to the ranking?John Maddens Lunchbox said:
@Brony and @Nugget
It’s all good. I thought I addressed it, but will try and clarify.
That's an incredible coincidence that your ranking is in alphabetical order!
Noted. I will follow the thread, but my head is spinning just trying to think of a top 50. To rank all 200+ in order would take months (especially since I am not in a U2 head space at the moment).
Easiest way to do this. Saves a ton of time. Sucks that With or Without You is at the #### end of the alphabet, but hey ho
It depends on how well you know the U2 material. I had been going through the vinyl and cd singles anyway so they were fresh in mind. Have to hammer the last 3 albums which is a bit of a chore and some of the more obscure stuff here, but depends on how organized you wanna be. Im categorizing first and then ranking within categories. My lowest ranked songs are grouped in the “Awful” bracket. The top ones in “ Elite”. Much easier to rank within a group of 40-50 than 228 at once.
I put together my own top-50 list and shared it with Mrs APK. My strategy worked, because she was immediately annoyed (reading it and saying "no.....no.....no.....") and is now working on her own. Neither of us can possibly rank every song, but I'll gladly share our respective top-50 lists whenever in the process it is deemed appropriate by the OP.People are certainly allowed to say wrong things like the bolded, but it doesn't mean you would have to validate those types of comments.
Really looking forward to this. I'm trying to convince Mrs APK to put together, at a minimum, her top-50 list. If I put one together, it will probably annoy her enough that she'll correct mine and make her own.
I could probably put together something like that, but no way could I do all 228.
As soon as songs from your top 25/40/50 etc start appearing, and they may be earlier than you expect, comment away. Alternatively wait until the end.Pip's Invitation said:
That's too bad, because Slug and Always Forever Now are easily in the top 200 U2 songs.
Wow! Look forward to hearing more at some point. I can’t think of any single album with more than……5 or 6 of my top-25!Mister CIA said:
The way I approached this was to go album by album. Some albums had incredible highs and deep lows, especially the early stuff. Some like Joshua Tree and Achtung have very few, if any lows and incredible highs. Album that surprised me was Songs of Innocence. I dont think theres a dud track on it. No highs mind you, but it was a dramatic improvement on No Line on the Horizon.Mister CIA said:
Yeah I understand. If Miss Sarajevo and Your Blue Room hadnt been on official U2 B Side albums, they would have too missed the cut. The Passengers album is better than at least one or two U2 albums, but the fact they didn’t put their name on it means I cant either.
Nor do you
I agree. It hit me at the perfect time to be influential. Up until then I thought U2 were only for the cool kids. Then it just blew me away with its excellence from start to finish. Previous U2 albums left me cold for considerable stretchs. After that they became must haves in my collection and Ive made a pretty penny selling some of the rarer stuff I had.
43, 77 and 224.
I haven’t visited this thread much, but it’s gotta be Party Girl, right?
If it's something from after 2004, I wouldn't have a clue.
Well known tracks aren’t likely ti see the light of day for awhile
One coming soon
Might see that one soon
That’s a Bingo
