U2 and Metallica sharing a stage ? Lars Ulrich is up for it

[toscano]

I have also thought about U2 and Metallica as contemporaries. Just different styles of music. Other than that, similar career arcs. Many people my age (35) grew up listening to both bands. Personally, the last Metallica album I liked was Master of Puppet. But Everything up to and including that KICKS ASS.

Then you'll love Death Magnetic.

 

[toscano]

They could do Hero of the Day.

I was just listening to the FM Broadcast of the London show from earlier in the week Metallica did for their fan club members (yes, that's right, a special show for fan club members, tix <$10), and was thinking 'Until it Sleeps' would be a good one for U2/collaboration, easy enough for Adam and Larry and an Edge-like solo, and an 'emotional' subject matter Bono can relate to (death of a parent)

 

[buzzkill27]

Oh come on, really?

Yes really their album went #1 in practically every country it was released in and here in the U.S. it sold almost 500,000 in 3 days...please tell me another band besides U2 that could pull that off...the answer is...no other band

 

[buzzkill27]

Here come the U2 snobs, shitting on everything else...

It works both ways,John..... I saw reaction on a Metallica fan board to this article...some Metallica fans were open to it and others were acting like the childish meatheads they are saying things like "U2 sucks..they are gay..what an awful band...etc."


Like I said it works both ways...can't please everybody

 

[MrPryck2U]

-Metallica and U2

Talk about two worlds colliding.

But, their paths have crossed before. If you went back in time to late 1991 into most of 1992, both of their albums were kicking major ass across the charts and their videos were played everywhere.

Stranger things have happened.

 

[toscano]

-Metallica and U2

Talk about two worlds colliding.

But, their paths have crossed before. If you went back in time to late 1991 into most of 1992, both of their albums were kicking major ass across the charts and their videos were played everywhere.

Stranger things have happened.

I think in every way except musically, they are kindred spirits and have followed similar (note, similar, NOT exactly the same) career paths.

Early 80's - Fiercely independent, wanting to do things their way, very non-conformist. Album sales and concert attendances grow steadily primarily through word of mouth, intense hardcore fan loyalties.

Late 80's/Early 90's - Massive rise to fame and fortune, huge album sales, crossover markets reached, stadium tours, Iconic albums.

Mid to late 90's - Rate of output slows, new musical territories explored, some fanbase backlash among longtime fans opposed to the changes in direction and musical experimentation. Continue to be a huge draw, have top selling albums regardless.

Early 00's - Here the paths diverge a bit. Metallica has internet backlash, releases weak album. Continue to be a huge draw and sales are still healthy. U2 returns to "classic" sound, rediscover some previously lost fanbase. Both bands win Grammies. Metallica has adverse reaction to internet leak (note, it was never about the money, but about when stuff got out)

Late 00's - Metallica has now adapted to the internet (all shows available for download, real-time updates thorugh fan site, etc). Now U2 has adverse reaction to internet via McGuinness. Metallica now returns to 'classic' sound and has their best fanbase-received album in years. U2 release weak album.

I guess if you lump the 00's as a whole, it is a similar story - both bands return to classic sound, both bands have a weak (but award-winning and top selling) release, both bands struggle(d) with the internet.

 

[buzzkill27]

I think in every way except musically, they are kindred spirits and have followed similar (note, similar, NOT exactly the same) career paths.

Early 80's - Fiercely independent, wanting to do things their way, very non-conformist. Album sales and concert attendances grow steadily primarily through word of mouth, intense hardcore fan loyalties.

Late 80's/Early 90's - Massive rise to fame and fortune, huge album sales, crossover markets reached, stadium tours, Iconic albums.

Mid to late 90's - Rate of output slows, new musical territories explored, some fanbase backlash among longtime fans opposed to the changes in direction and musical experimentation. Continue to be a huge draw, have top selling albums regardless.

Early 00's - Here the paths diverge a bit. Metallica has internet backlash, releases weak album. Continue to be a huge draw and sales are still healthy. U2 returns to "classic" sound, rediscover some previously lost fanbase. Both bands win Grammies. Metallica has adverse reaction to internet leak (note, it was never about the money, but about when stuff got out)

Late 00's - Metallica has now adapted to the internet (all shows available for download, real-time updates thorugh fan site, etc). Now U2 has adverse reaction to internet via McGuinness. Metallica now returns to 'classic' sound and has their best fanbase-received album in years. U2 release weak album.

I guess if you lump the 00's as a whole, it is a similar story - both bands return to classic sound, both bands have a weak (but award-winning and top selling) release, both bands struggle(d) with the internet.

Very well said....excellent observations

Ulrich has always been a fan of U2....I remember him saying on a VH1 show once that he loved the Under A Blood Red Sky video and he thought that Achtung Baby was one of the greatest rock albums of all time.

 

[doctorwho]

The thing about Metallica is they started out with a very niche audience, they grew and expanded that audience in the 90's, but they've seemed to have gone back to that niche audience. Not that that's a bad thing, I just think "closet current contemporary" is a stretch for Metallica have fallen a little in their stature. To be honest I'm not sure who I would consider their CLOSEST CURRENT contemporary, I mean bands like Pearl Jam or REM come to mind but PJ seems to keep the biggest cult band status and REM have slipped a little lately. And I'm not talking about quality here, I'm talking purely on how "big" they are...

I don't think Metallica is that "niche" or slipping. Their latest album sold nearly 500K copies in the U.S. in just 3 days! Had it been a full week, we could have seen sales of 750K-1M units.

While I'm not really a fan (barring a few hit songs) I will say a collaboration would be a challenge. Still, I'm sure there are several U2 songs ("Bullet", "Fly", "Exit", "Love & Peace", etc.) that may sound great with a heavier guitar sound. And Bono's restored vocals could add a new dimension to some Metallica songs too. However, my guess is that they'd do a cover. But I could only see this for one or two songs at most.

 

[david]

Yeah, how about Metallica doing a U2 song?

 

[BVS]

Maybe they could just switch their versions of 'One'...

I can just imagine Bono screaming "Darkness imprisoning me..."

And James growling out "Love is a temple..."

 

[Addicted To Bad]

James Hetfield and Bono singing together ???!!!!...WOW!! Can´t wait to see that...

Their voices are quite different but powerful..

Awesome ambition, James!! !!!



_____________________
YOU TAKE ME HIGHER

 

[Vlad n U 2]

Very well said....excellent observations

Ulrich has always been a fan of U2....I remember him saying on a VH1 show once that he loved the Under A Blood Red Sky video and he thought that Achtung Baby was one of the greatest rock albums of all time.

Personally I wouldn't mind if U2 + Metallica played together, I really never imagined anything like this happening whatsoever.

And I never knew that they liked each others music. That must be a very good thing.

 

[toscano]

Maybe they could just switch their versions of 'One'...

I can just imagine Bono screaming "Darkness imprisoning me..."

And James growling out "Love is a temple..."

As long as Mary J. Bilge isn't involved I'd be all for it....

 

[u2search]

Didn't he say: on the same bill? As in: opening for U2?

 

[Strongbow]

I think in every way except musically, they are kindred spirits and have followed similar (note, similar, NOT exactly the same) career paths.

Early 80's - Fiercely independent, wanting to do things their way, very non-conformist. Album sales and concert attendances grow steadily primarily through word of mouth, intense hardcore fan loyalties.

Late 80's/Early 90's - Massive rise to fame and fortune, huge album sales, crossover markets reached, stadium tours, Iconic albums.

Mid to late 90's - Rate of output slows, new musical territories explored, some fanbase backlash among longtime fans opposed to the changes in direction and musical experimentation. Continue to be a huge draw, have top selling albums regardless.

Early 00's - Here the paths diverge a bit. Metallica has internet backlash, releases weak album. Continue to be a huge draw and sales are still healthy. U2 returns to "classic" sound, rediscover some previously lost fanbase. Both bands win Grammies. Metallica has adverse reaction to internet leak (note, it was never about the money, but about when stuff got out)

Late 00's - Metallica has now adapted to the internet (all shows available for download, real-time updates thorugh fan site, etc). Now U2 has adverse reaction to internet via McGuinness. Metallica now returns to 'classic' sound and has their best fanbase-received album in years. U2 release weak album.

I guess if you lump the 00's as a whole, it is a similar story - both bands return to classic sound, both bands have a weak (but award-winning and top selling) release, both bands struggle(d) with the internet.

U2 have always been a stadium level band since 1987 INDEPENDENT of the need for double billing or festival line ups in order to sell tickets for a stadium show. Metallica surprisingly needs multi-bill line ups if their going to play a stadium in North America.

In the 00s, U2 have released two studio albums so far, one that sold 12 million copies and another that sold 9 million copies. Both strong selling albums. 15 grammy awards one from these two albums. Elevation tour grosses $143 million. Vertigo tour grosses $389 million and is the 2nd highest grossing tour of all time. Nearly every show soldout the day tickets were released. Stadiums played in every city except those in Canada and the United States.

Metallica prior to this week have only had one studio album that sold nearly 4 million copies worldwide. The tour, started out with heavy support from other bands in 2003 on the stadium portion. The return to arena's in 2004 in North America saw them struggle to sellout these smaller venues on their own. Over this past weekend, they only soldout 4 shows in the first two days of release despite the fact that most tickets are only $60 dollars.

Metallica's popularity, despite impressive first week sales numbers for their new album, is much smaller than it was in the 1990s. You could say there are some similarities in their commercial history, but it definitely diverges as you get into the 00s.

 

[toscano]

Metallica prior to this week have only had one studio album that sold nearly 4 million copies worldwide.

Oh please, if you're going to completely miss the point snd start comparing dick sizes at least get the numbers right.

IN US SALES ALONE, Black album has sold 14Million (U2's best is JT at 10M) Justice 8M (same as AB), Puppets 6M, Garage Inc, S&M, Load all 5M, (all from the RIAA website, check it yourself) so I really don't know where you're getting the <4M/album WORLDWIDE number you quoted from, you're way way way off. They all sold more in US than any U2 album except AB and JT.

They're two of the biggest acts in the world, and their paths have been similar, that was the point you missed. It was not about a childish 'mine is bigger than yours' contest.

Last time U2 tried to play a stadium tour in the US it was considerably less than 100% successful, often playing to half-empty stadiums. U2 hasn't been a stadium act here in over 10 years, and probably still won't be next time around either.

If they were both playing on the same night i'd always choose U2 first, but they need to step up their game. Their tickets are getting to be out of sight price wise, touring in a VERY down economy right before and after Xmas was always a risky move, but unlike U2, Metallica is not QUITE as much about the money.

Their ticket prices are lower, their shows are longer, their staging will be in the round so more people can actually see the band, downloads of the show will be available within 48hours, fan club members got great seats and they have a system to keep them out of the hands of the scalpers. I hope U2 and Metallica's paths will still be similar and u2 can pick up a thing or 2 about catering to their fans' needs.

 

[The John Tree]

Yeah, I don't think he meant collaborating together, as I don't think that would work. Particularly with Edge, who has a totally different style from James and Kirk.

Interesting note:

During the recording of The Black Album, a Metallica song featured a heavily echoed, droning guitar part during the chorus of "Sad But True". Kirk Hammett called it "The U2 riff."

 

[The John Tree]

In reply to Toscano's post:

I was a Metallica freak from the moment I heard them. They are what truly got into music. That said, I became a U2 freak later on. So both bands struggle for pole position in my heart.

I'm not going to get into the "who's better" contest, because my heart can't take it, and also because I don't think it matters: both are legendary and once you've reached that plateau, it's all moot anyway.

But in response to what you said:

I'm a member of the Metallica fanclub, and I got fantastic seats to the concert in DC in January. So I'm very pleased about that.

 

[The John Tree]

And as far as their similar career paths:

Boy/October/War/Unforgettable Fire/JT/Rattle = Kill 'Em All/Ride The Lightning/Master/Justice/Black. The "essential early" albums. This is where both bands built their legendary, definitive sound and became insanely popular on an underground, and then populist level. All of these albums featured a new style, U2 with their spacey, ambient post-punk/stadium rock and Metallica with their groundbreaking form of heavy metal, dubbed thrash. Both bands would ascend to household-name status.

Achtung/Zooropa/Pop = Load/ReLoad/S&M. Here is where both bands, during the 90s, and with the help of some interesting Anton Corbijn photography, redefined both their sound and their image. U2 took their anthemic, straight ahead, spiritual stadium rock and made it electronic, dirty, and sexual. They made it dancey. They dressed in the latest trends and became 'cool' rock stars. Metallica took their epic, European, classically influenced metal and turned it into American roots music. Whereas they used to be influenced by classical music, this time they were influenced by the blues, country, and southern rock music. They made it bluesy.

ATYCLB/HTDAAB = St. Anger/Death Magnetic. This is where both bands, in the new millenium, became considered "legendary" in their time. Their peers were no longer The Killers or Slayer and were now The Rolling Stones and Black Sabbath. As a result, each band turned out two albums featuring a return to earlier styles of play, but not quite. ATYCLB was not a return of "80s" U2. They sound nothing alike. It's just that they both featured more straight ahead, spiritual rock songs. Similarly, St. Anger and Death Magnetic don't sound like old Metallica. But they are fast, heavy, and complex like old Metallica. This period features two albums which recapture the essence of the band and give a "we're back" statement. One album classic, the other heavily debated. In U2's case, ATYCLB is the classic while HTDAAB is debated. In Metallica's case, St. Anger is debated (and heavily thought to be the group's worst effort), while Death Magnetic is a classic.


I think they have very similar career paths.

Also, I do think there is at least some cameraderie within the bands. Maybe not between all members, but Lars Ulrich I know has a relationship with the band, at least Adam Clayton. Ulrich is (was) a huge collector of Basquiat paintings and stated in an interview that he didn't feel so bad about being a rock star with a nice art collection because "Adam Clayton of U2 has a Basquiat hanging in his foyer".

 

[david]

On the subject of Basquiat, I recently read that U2 donated one of their Basquiat pantings they had in a studio to charity or something.

 

[U2girl]

And as far as their similar career paths:

Boy/October/War/Unforgettable Fire/JT/Rattle = Kill 'Em All/Ride The Lightning/Master/Justice/Black. The "essential early" albums. This is where both bands built their legendary, definitive sound and became insanely popular on an underground, and then populist level. All of these albums featured a new style, U2 with their spacey, ambient post-punk/stadium rock and Metallica with their groundbreaking form of heavy metal, dubbed thrash. Both bands would ascend to household-name status.

Achtung/Zooropa/Pop = Load/ReLoad/S&M. Here is where both bands, during the 90s, and with the help of some interesting Anton Corbijn photography, redefined both their sound and their image. U2 took their anthemic, straight ahead, spiritual stadium rock and made it electronic, dirty, and sexual. They made it dancey. They dressed in the latest trends and became 'cool' rock stars. Metallica took their epic, European, classically influenced metal and turned it into American roots music. Whereas they used to be influenced by classical music, this time they were influenced by the blues, country, and southern rock music. They made it bluesy.

ATYCLB/HTDAAB = St. Anger/Death Magnetic. This is where both bands, in the new millenium, became considered "legendary" in their time. Their peers were no longer The Killers or Slayer and were now The Rolling Stones and Black Sabbath. As a result, each band turned out two albums featuring a return to earlier styles of play, but not quite. ATYCLB was not a return of "80s" U2. They sound nothing alike. It's just that they both featured more straight ahead, spiritual rock songs. Similarly, St. Anger and Death Magnetic don't sound like old Metallica. But they are fast, heavy, and complex like old Metallica. This period features two albums which recapture the essence of the band and give a "we're back" statement. One album classic, the other heavily debated. In U2's case, ATYCLB is the classic while HTDAAB is debated. In Metallica's case, St. Anger is debated (and heavily thought to be the group's worst effort), while Death Magnetic is a classic.

I'd say Death Magnetic is like Metallica's ATYCLB - both albums are seen as return to "basic sound" and moreso regaining of popularity after Pop/St. Anger. I don't know whether 'Magnetic is a Metallica classic but Lars said it was their best received album since the Black Album. (same could be said for All that... best received album after AB)

 

[U2girl]

"Metallica is not QUITE as much about the money"

YouTube - Napster Bad

 

[paco_one]

U2 and Metallica, the greatest rock bands today, they have great song to be shared, great guitar bands.

 

[paco_one]

Yeah, how about Metallica doing a U2 song?

Sepultura are more heavy, and recordered bullet the blue sky, u2 have great heavy songs, the fly, even better, until the end if the world, and a lotta more songs, why people just remember the cute songs?

 

[toscano]

Sepultura are more heavy, and recordered bullet the blue sky, u2 have great heavy songs, the fly, even better, until the end if the world, and a lotta more songs, why people just remember the cute songs?

Queesnryche also recorded Bullet. Add Gone to the good candidates list.

 

[toscano]

"Metallica is not QUITE as much about the money"

YouTube - Napster Bad

People will always believe what they want to believe about Napster and Metallica, the issue was over CONTROL of when the material is released, thye didn't have a fit over their back catalog on there, it was over unfinished songs.

Still, now we have McGuinne$$ wanting to move the bands business to other countries to escape taxation and then tax everyone's internet access to he can have a bigger slice of the pie, now THAT is as about money as either of the 2 bands in question.

McGuinne$$ aside, the bands themselves have integrity and credibility and have forged a very close connection with their fans over the years, I think that has helped keep them at the top regardless of debacles like St.Anger or HTDAAB (insert Pop instead of HTDAAB there for the less discriminating consumer ).

Any bets on U2 ticket prices next time ? What's the over/under on $200 ?

 

[U2girl]

McGuiness is right that the internet providers, the labels etc should find some agreement on how to handle copyright issues. That's better than "SUE NAPSTER" attitude any day.

Only parts of the band's "business" were moved. The new tax rate btw is 45 % and that this is about a third of the band's income, the royalties. Also, it used to be 0 % so even with the move they will still be paying more than before. But why be sensible about your taxes if you make a lot of money if you can have street cred instead ? Or is U2 paying taxes everyone's business only now with Bono's activism ?

What's kept U2 at the top was Beautiful day. HTDAAB is only a debacle in the internet fandom circles, unlike Pop that is scorned at the U2 fandom in greater picture, with the critics as the years have passed and even the band itself was never 100 % on it. They recovered whereas I doubt Metallica will ever be close to their early 90's fame.

As long as 50 $ is the ticket for the best seat in the house and they don't charge as much as the Stones, Macca or Mads things should be fine.

 

[TheBrazilianFly]

Wow, that would be amazing. Metallica is my favorite band along with U2. Seeing them playing something together would be out of control awesomeness to me. Or one playing a song from each other would be pretty great as well. Death Magnetic is one of Metallica's best albums and shows that they are still great as is U2. They have a lot of parallels on their career and the same kind of attitude towards trying new things and expanding with their own particular sound that they have. I know that Bono and Lars have hung out quite a few times on the past and I read somewhere that Lars just followed U2 on tour for a while during the Vertigo Tour. I know they like each other's music.

 

[toscano]

They recovered whereas I doubt Metallica will ever be close to their early 90's fame.

As long as 50 $ is the ticket for the best seat in the house and they don't charge as much as the Stones, Macca or Mads things should be fine.

I hate that U2 fans rationalize this by using the Stones, McCartney or Madonna as the bar. On the one hand they compare U2 to Pearl Jam or REM to show how 'Relevant' they are are, but when it comes to ticket prices it's 'well it's not as expensive as Madonna". Funny. I hope for their sakes that the economy has recovered by the time the tour rolls around.

Again, back to the point, the parallel / similar career arcs. U2 recovered from Pop/Passengers, Metallica has recovered from Relaod/St.Anger

U2 will likely never have another 10M seller (in the US) like JT, Metallica will likely never have another 14M seller (in the US) like the Black album.

 

[Strongbow]

Oh please, if you're going to completely miss the point snd start comparing dick sizes at least get the numbers right.

IN US SALES ALONE, Black album has sold 14Million (U2's best is JT at 10M) Justice 8M (same as AB), Puppets 6M, Garage Inc, S&M, Load all 5M, (all from the RIAA website, check it yourself) so I really don't know where you're getting the <4M/album WORLDWIDE number you quoted from, you're way way way off. They all sold more in US than any U2 album except AB and JT.

In the 00s, Metallica have only released one studio album of new material. It was called St. Anger. It sold about 4 million copies worldwide(1.7 million in the United States according to soundscan, 2 million shipped according to RIAA). ATYCLB by U2 sold 12 million copies worldwide. HTDAAB sold 9 million copies worldwide. I was comparing the bands in THIS decade, and their paths from a purely commercial stand point have significantly gone in different directions.

Last time U2 tried to play a stadium tour in the US it was considerably less than 100% successful, often playing to half-empty stadiums. U2 hasn't been a stadium act here in over 10 years, and probably still won't be next time around either.

U2 could have easily played stadiums in North America on the Vertigo tour, but initially went with Arena's to be safe. Nearly every arena show soldout within minutes or hours showing that there was plenty of excess demand not met that could fill stadiums.

Say what you will about the POPMART tour, its still a higher level of success than anything Metallica has ever done in their career to date. U2 got over 40,000 people to their show in Washington DC on POPMART, Metallica current ARENA show in Washington DC is still not soldout and the capacity is only 19,000.

U2 is in a higher league than Metallica when it comes to touring. Today, comparing Metallica to Coldplay would be more accurate.

Their ticket prices are lower, their shows are longer, their staging will be in the round so more people can actually see the band, downloads of the show will be available within 48hours, fan club members got great seats and they have a system to keep them out of the hands of the scalpers. I hope U2 and Metallica's paths will still be similar and u2 can pick up a thing or 2 about catering to their fans' needs

Supply and Demand determines ticket price.