Coldplay - Viva La Vida - ongoing discussion

[U2Fanatic4ever]

I haven't read the rest of this thread, but should I buy the new album or not?
Just a simple yes/no will do.
thanks.



Amy,

 

[angelordevil]

How to Dismantle an Atomic Rob.

No my logic is, if you have only negative things to say, and to say them repeatedly, in different threads, then why bother saying them at all...

Exactly. "Repeatedly" is the operative word. We're all critical at various points here...it's called "debate" and "discussion." Sarcasm and humour are often a great part of the mix, but there's a line, you know? For example, there's a huge difference between calling the lead singer of a band you dislike a "twat" and (repeatedly) calling him a "piece of shit." That definition should maybe be reserved for certain political leaders, or people who shoot squirrels for fun.

...If it reminds people of Streets, it reminds people of Streets. You can't disprove that. And the bottom line is that if there are a significant number of people who believe it, then Coldplay is doing something wrong (or right, depending on how you want to look at it).

Kind of like how you remind me of Rob, and that a significant number of people may believe that? You might be doing something wrong (or right, depending on how you want to look at it).

The only U2-like quality I hear is the vocal part at the end...the "OH-Ohhh-Ohhh! part. U2 certainly don't own the copyright to that. Check out anything by The Arcade Fire. The rest of the song? It's like a fusion of Sigur Rós, Radiohead...and perhaps even Coldplay, themselves? It's just a beautiful instrumental that works wonders while hiking with your mp3 player. What more do you want?

I haven't read the rest of this thread, but should I buy the new album or not?
Just a simple yes/no will do.
thanks.

Yes. (It's also the title of my favourite song on the album.)

 

[LemonMelon]

U2 certainly don't own the copyright to that.

Does that matter? It reminds them of U2. Let it remind them of U2 and leave it at that.

It actually reminds me of some instrumentals from David Bowie's Low.

 

[u2popmofo]

U2 reminds me of Television, as that's who they blatantly ripped off, so by association should we all be saying Coldplay ripped off Television?

Thread over. Shut the fuck up, everyone.

 

[angelordevil]

Does that matter? It reminds them of U2. Let it remind them of U2 and leave it at that.

I did say the ending reminded me of U2.

This is my point: There's a massive difference between a person using "reminds," and saying "the piece of shit copied," and then someone else referencing 14 different album reviews because they can't utilize their own thoughts to form an opinion. That attitude bothers me, GREATLY, obviously. I wish I could "leave it at that," but I'm obviously very anal.

It actually reminds me of some instrumentals from David Bowie's Low.

I'm blaming Brian Eno for all of this.

 

[Zoots]

Bottomline, whether they copied other artists or not, the album is fucking good! It's aural pleasure and meant to be experienced on good speakers. Sure, I hear Radiohead, Arcade Fire and U2 influences but nothing sounds blatant to me.

 

[angelordevil]

Bottomline, whether they copied other artists or not, the album is fucking good! It's aural pleasure and meant to be experienced on good speakers. Sure, I hear Radiohead, Arcade Fire and U2 influences but nothing sounds blatant to me.

Bottomline, whether they copied other artists or not, the album is fucking good! It's aural pleasure and meant to be experienced on good speakers. Sure, I hear Radiohead, Arcade Fire and U2 influences but nothing sounds blatant to me.

Bottomline, whether they copied other artists or not, the album is fucking good! It's aural pleasure and meant to be experienced on good speakers. Sure, I hear Radiohead, Arcade Fire and U2 influences but nothing sounds blatant to me.

I think you nailed it.

 

[corianderstem]

I haven't read the rest of this thread, but should I buy the new album or not?
Just a simple yes/no will do.
thanks.

Yes.

 

[GirlsAloudFan]

I haven't read the rest of this thread, but should I buy the new album or not?
Just a simple yes/no will do.
thanks.

No.

 

[LemonMelon]

I haven't read the rest of this thread, but should I buy the new album or not?
Just a simple yes/no will do.
thanks.



Amy,

Listen first, then decide.

 

[phillyfan26]

no no you have it all wrong...I stand by everything I have said up until the post before last...the only thing that was proved was that "Life..." and Streets do not have similar chord progressions...and that's not even what I was trying to say in my original post, but yes, it sure looks like that's what I was saying. In my original post, I was simply commenting on the fact that certain chord progressions like the one heard in "Lovers In Japan/Reign of Love" and certain song structures, etc. aren't really debatable. Those are definitive aspects of music that "are what they are." I didn't mean to connect that statement to the question of whether or not Streets and "Life..." had the same chord progression or not, but the way I constructed that original post made it seem like that was in fact what I was doing. I am knowledgeable enough musically to know that Streets and Life In Technicolor do not have the same chord progression...even someone without muchmusical training could see that. Pfan, nothing was proved wrong except the idea that Streets doesn't have the same chord progression as "Life...," and that wasn't even what I was trying to prove...I just misspoke...if you think I'm trying to cover my ass I really don't know what to tell you, except to just not get too worked up over it, and don't let it keep you up at night...and...besides...what do you mean, "trying to cover your ass" - why would I even try to do that? You aren't making sense

Coldplay is still nothing more than a U2 ripoff band...a dumbed down, pathetic, sugary version of a rock and roll band...you can deny it all you want, but it's really not a far-fetched idea. So Pfan, "He copies U2 ... wait, that was disproved ..." - NO, you're wrong, that wasn't disproved...GG proved that "Streets" doesn't have the same chord progression as "Life..." - that's it...you get that? Or do you need this spoon fed to you?

Rob, you blatantly said that Life in Technicolor and Where the Streets Have No Name have the same chord progression:

how can you say that "Life In Technicolor" isn't a rip of Streets/COBL?!?! Chord progressions, song structure, etc. cannot be argued based on interpretation...it is what it is...

You're literally saying: "You cannot argue that Life in Technicolor is not a rip-off of Streets/COBL because chord progressions and song structure cannot be argued." And now are saying you never said that, and that we are "misinterpreting" your post because you "phrased it incorrectly."

And you're trying to make me believe you, and it's not working. How am I supposed to take anything you say seriously after that? You're telling me one thing when another thing happened. You're trying to make me into a fool, and I'm not having it. And you cannot expect me to take anything you say seriously while you sit here, and yes, cover your own ass. You're trying to cover your blatantly incorrect statement as a misinterpretation to try to be taken seriously. That's covering your ass.

So, I really hope no one engages you any longer unless you stop trying to bullshit us. I find it insulting that you are trying to fool me like this, like I'm not smart enough to notice your mistakes.

The equivalent of what you are doing is if I were to start saying right now and from now on in this thread that I did not accuse you of trying to cover your own ass. I've said it multiple times, but now I'm going to say it never happened and you only believe that because of some poor phrasing. That's the stupidity of what you are trying to do right now.

 

[phillyfan26]

What?! I don't understand how you do not understand what I'm saying....are you sure you read my last post carefully? Not sure what you're talking about- In my original post, the one GG posted, I said some things "are what they are," and that idea was separate from the Streets/Life.. statement...but if I remember correctly, I mention all this in one small paragraph in back-to-back sentences so it comes off as if I'm saying Streets and "Life In..." have the same chord progression. In my last post, I wasn't saying that I misspoke regarding my original statement that some things in music are definitive like chord progressions, etc. and "are what they are"...What I said was that the "are what they are" statement was misinterpreted by GG and I'm sure others, and thought to be connected to the Streets/Life in.. comment, and as a result, GG thought that I meant that the chord progressions in Street and Life In... were clearly the same (are what they are) so she posted the chord progressions for us to prove that they were in fact different. And what do you mean not wanting to admit my original post was incorrect? It wasn't incorrect, that's what I'm trying to tell you!!! My original post, the one GG found, was simply poorly written and misleading- I'm not trying to "cover my ass" or whatever the hell you guys think I'm doing....

It's very understandable why he doesn't get your post: he's giving you the benefit of the doubt and assuming your correction is genuine. Only problem is, to make that assumption is to read something that doesn't make sense. Because that's the case: your current posts make no sense. You're continually denying something GG quoted. Something we all saw, something we all know happened: you said Streets and LIT have the same chord progression. It wasn't poor phrasing: you said that. It happened.

What you're trying to do is say you didn't mean to say that. But you did, and you were proven wrong, and now you're trying to look like you know what you're talking about still by saying you weren't wrong.

 

[phillyfan26]

There's no point in getting technical about the mechanics of it, because all that proves is that Coldplay didn't try to carbon copy anything, which has never been the real argument. If it reminds people of Streets, it reminds people of Streets. You can't disprove that. And the bottom line is that if there are a significant number of people who believe it, then Coldplay is doing something wrong (or right, depending on how you want to look at it).

You cannot prove it or disprove it. I've not even listened to the song, but it's just a person-by-person thing, plain and simple.

Screwy thinks HMTMKMKM sounds like Panic in Detroit. God only knows why, but he does. Should this same point hold true in that case?

 

[U2Fanatic4ever]

pfan...

 

[LemonMelon]

You cannot prove it or disprove it. I've not even listened to the song, but it's just a person-by-person thing, plain and simple.

Screwy thinks HMTMKMKM sounds like Panic in Detroit. God only knows why, but he does. Should this same point hold true in that case?

It all depends on the phrasing, my good man. If you believe something sounds like something else, that's just fine, but once you start using words/phrases like "stolen", "carbon copy", and "Chris Martin is a piece of shit who steals from Bono at every turn", things become more objective.

Screwy used "stolen", Rob used...all of those in form. Therefore, I'm with you 100%.

 

[LMP]

Rob, you blatantly said that Life in Technicolor and Where the Streets Have No Name have the same chord progression:



You're literally saying: "You cannot argue that Life in Technicolor is not a rip-off of Streets/COBL because chord progressions and song structure cannot be argued." And now are saying you never said that, and that we are "misinterpreting" your post because you "phrased it incorrectly."

And you're trying to make me believe you, and it's not working. How am I supposed to take anything you say seriously after that? You're telling me one thing when another thing happened. You're trying to make me into a fool, and I'm not having it. And you cannot expect me to take anything you say seriously while you sit here, and yes, cover your own ass. You're trying to cover your blatantly incorrect statement as a misinterpretation to try to be taken seriously. That's covering your ass.

So, I really hope no one engages you any longer unless you stop trying to bullshit us. I find it insulting that you are trying to fool me like this, like I'm not smart enough to notice your mistakes.

The equivalent of what you are doing is if I were to start saying right now and from now on in this thread that I did not accuse you of trying to cover your own ass. I've said it multiple times, but now I'm going to say it never happened and you only believe that because of some poor phrasing. That's the stupidity of what you are trying to do right now.

You know I agree, but just let it go. It's not worth it.

 

[Screwtape2]

Rob, you may hear another song in LIT but it isn't a ripoff. I said U2 stole the riff from Panic In Detriot but Gibsongirl kindly showed me that on paper they aren't the same. So I admitted I was wrong and that I choose a poor choice of words. Don't get offended or defensive about being wrong when someone factually proves something. You should be grateful that someone took the time to correct you. It is perfectly fine to think things sound alike but don't call a band a ripoff because of it.

You really should apologize to Gibsongirl and thank her for taking the time to show you the facts. It enlightened you and should give you a new perspective on the band. You don't have to like them but don't call them ripoffs.

 

[GirlsAloudFan]

Leave Rob33 alone!!!

 

[phillyfan26]

Rob, you may hear another song in LIT but it isn't a ripoff. I said U2 stole the riff from Panic In Detriot but Gibsongirl kindly showed me that on paper they aren't the same. So I admitted I was wrong and that I choose a poor choice of words. Don't get offended or defensive about being wrong when someone factually proves something. You should be grateful that someone took the time to correct you. It is perfectly fine to think things sound alike but don't call a band a ripoff because of it.

You really should apologize to Gibsongirl and thank her for taking the time to show you the facts. It enlightened you and should give you a new perspective on the band. You don't have to like them but don't call them ripoffs.

Well, ElMel and I corrected you about Panic in Detroit, but yeah, same point applies.

 

[Screwtape2]

Well, ElMel and I corrected you about Panic in Detroit, but yeah, same point applies.

The three of you did yes. Sorry for not giving you credit.

 

[BoMac]

Leave Rob33 alone!!!

Oh man, my sides hurt!!!

 

[phillyfan26]

The three of you did yes. Sorry for not giving you credit.

I'm just trying to make sure Rob doesn't git nitpicky about the points and misses the important picture, which is why I noted that it was LMel who played it out and commented on it and I who wrote the chords out for the two songs.

 

[Screwtape2]

I'm just trying to make sure Rob doesn't git nitpicky about the points and misses the important picture, which is why I noted that it was LMel who played it out and commented on it and I who wrote the chords out for the two songs.

Okay. I thought of GG because she seemed to correct everyone.

 

[Rob33]

omfg where do I start....I don't believe my eyes....this is UNREAL....I come back from the beach, and this is what I get...fuck....ok, give me a second

 

[bono_212]

Ok, I am most certainly not a huge Coldplay fan, but I decided to give this a listen because....well come on it's the only thing anyone is talking about on the forum right now. Gotta say, I almost stopped after Yes, because I was just not liking it, but I stuck it out, and I'm glad I did, the second half more then makes up for the first (aside from the opening track, man I really liked the opening track.) Not that I entirely hated the first half, Lost (!) was really good. So, I'll think about picking the album up, probably will, I really liked the second half a lot.

 

[Rob33]

You really should apologize to Gibsongirl and thank her for taking the time to show you the facts. It enlightened you and should give you a new perspective on the band. You don't have to like them but don't call them ripoffs.

Ok...I don't understand this...Screwtape...I apologized already, in my first post after GG brought back my original quote...you need to read more carefully or something, I don't know

 

[U2Fanatic4ever]

part deux...

 

[Rob33]

Rob, here's a place to go if you'd like to continue on your level of intelligent conversation:

PLEBA - U2 Feedback

didn't catch this until just now....Lem, what do you have against PLEBA? PLEBA is a nice place...And I do visit there from time to time...but thanks anyway

 

[Screwtape2]

Ok...I don't understand this...Screwtape...I apologized already, in my first post after GG brought back my original quote...you need to read more carefully or something, I don't know

If you did that's great.

Can you at least stop calling Coldplay ripoffs? I mean I love Kate Bush maybe more than anyone on the site and they were heavily influenced by her on a few songs: Speed of Sound and Talk. I think it is cool they influenced by other artists I like. Why can't you stop calling them ripoffs and appreciate they like some of your favorite artists. Clearly as Gibsongirl and many, many, many others have shown they aren't stealing other artist's work. So please end the madness and just stop saying Coldplay are ripoffs.

 

[Rob33]

Pfan, how are you doing?

Look dude...I really want you to concentrate on what I'm about to say...carefully read, carefully examine, maybe use a magnifying glass...I really don't know dude...just do something...if you don't realize how off the mark you really are after reading this post, then you need some serious help, and you need to act NOW...just like Bono tells you to do...it's the same idea dude!!! No...I kid...but seriously, try to understand, and please, take me seriously

And you cannot expect me to take anything you say seriously while you sit here, and yes, cover your own ass.

Again, please try to take me seriously...if you haven't taken me seriously, then that's probably the reason you are so off the mark...

OK....so you begin:

Rob, you blatantly said that Life in Technicolor and Where the Streets Have No Name have the same chord progression:

and then you go on to quote me, let's take another look at that quote:


"[FONT=&quot]how can you say that "Life In Technicolor" isn't a rip of Streets/COBL?!?! Chord progressions, song structure, etc. cannot be argued based on interpretation...it is what it is..." -[/FONT] [FONT=&quot] Rob33[/FONT][FONT=&quot]

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]now, this is where the philly fan goes crazy:

[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]You're literally saying: "You cannot argue that Life in Technicolor is not a rip-off of Streets/COBL because chord progressions and song structure cannot be argued." And now are saying you never said that, and that we are "misinterpreting" your post because you "phrased it incorrectly."[/FONT]

NOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! dammit philly fan!!! dammit dammit dammit.....

see this is what I've been saying the entire time....I sloppily constructed that post, and said ""[FONT=&quot]how can you say that "Life In Technicolor" isn't a rip of Streets/COBL?!?!" [/FONT] [FONT=&quot]

and then immediately followed that statement up with this:

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]"Chord progressions, song structure, etc. cannot be argued based on interpretation...it is what it is..."

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]Do you see? I first mention the Streets/Life... comparison, and then, moving on to a separate thought, mention that some things in music can't be argued based on interpretation, "it is what it is"....I didn't mean to connect the two statements like that in one paragraph...In other words, I didn't mean that the comparison between Streets/Life... "is what it is"...I just meant that some things in music are definitive, like chord progressions...separate from my feelings about Streets/Life In... - my second statement should have been completely separate, but by writing those sentences one after the other in that manner, it seemed like I was inferring that Streets/ Life.. "cannot be argued based on interpretation" ....

I'm trying to think of more crap to say to help you understand...but I honestly cannot right now...do you understand now?!?!? It's so simple what has happened here...yet I'm getting bombarded for silly reasons...I'm not trying to "cover my ass" or anything like that....or "insult" you as you suggested...If anything, you should apologize for randomly accusing me of things...
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]