Who will be the world's next biggest band?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
...and that's about as far from Britpop as you can get.

We can go back and forth about how great (or less-than-great) they were, but I'm saying there was a universality in the music that broke them out of that genre more often than their contemporaries.
 
My problem with Urban Hymns is the length of the tracks. While nearly every one of the tracks runs too long, The Rolling People is absolutely absurd. Come On is obviously no better. To me, A Storm In Heaven is more economical, and has the beautiful atmosphere I wish Urban Hymns had.

On the other hand, I think Urban Hymns is very strong melodically, and I can't argue with the singles. The closer to space rock they get though, the more I'd rather be listening to early Verve or Spiritualized or something.

Of course, I realize I'm in the minority preferring early shoegaze Verve over the epic Urban Hymns. That's OK; with the EP, I'd say there's more than enough Verve music to suit my tastes.
 
A shame the guitarist is a basket case.

What. Oh, do you mean, a basket case as in mad as in mad guitar playing? Then yes, I agree.

Is Ashcroft not a legendary asshole?

It's what makes him entertaining.

By far and away the best thing about the Verve. Proof: A Storm In Heaven.

Ashcroft solo is shiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit.

I see that and I raise you A Northern Soul. It's amazing, I like A Storm In Heaven but it hasn't clicked with me in the least.

Everybody who hasn't listened to All In the Mind and Gravity Grave must do so now.

I liked Love is Noise when it came out. A lot.

I still think it's a brilliant song. Loved the gliding, wide open spaces feel.

My problem with Urban Hymns is the length of the tracks. While nearly every one of the tracks runs too long, The Rolling People is absolutely absurd. Come On is obviously no better. To me, A Storm In Heaven is more economical, and has the beautiful atmosphere I wish Urban Hymns had.

On the other hand, I think Urban Hymns is very strong melodically, and I can't argue with the singles. The closer to space rock they get though, the more I'd rather be listening to early Verve or Spiritualized or something.

Of course, I realize I'm in the minority preferring early shoegaze Verve over the epic Urban Hymns. That's OK; with the EP, I'd say there's more than enough Verve music to suit my tastes.

The Rolling People and Come On absurd? Do you mean as in utter and complete mindblowing brilliance? Please, I hope you do. Both kick ass so much. :D

I really like Urban Hymns, and yes, I agree completely regarding the album length and also I'll add that there are a few tracks that I don't care for.

Highlights for me would be Sonnet, The Rolling People, Catching the Butterfly (absolute gem), Space and Time (depending on my mood though), Weeping Willow, Lucky Man and Come On.

And while on the subject of The Verve, Forth is a very, very underrated album.
 
With Oasis, Liam has that snarl of a vocal that's far from welcoming, more suited to a Rolling Stones ripoff band than one who wants to emulate the Beatles. And of course they were douchebags, which failed to break them here. No America, no international reign.

I need to challenge the idea that Oasis never "broke" in the US. Morning Glory sold over four million albums here, and "Wonderwall" and "Champagne Supernova" were both on constant rotation on MTV and radio. Hell, I still hear those two fairly often on the radio. Oasis just failed to sustain the momentum that they had accomplished.
 
As far as I'm concerned, Nick McCabe is The Verve. But then I'm part of the Early Verve Cult, primarily due to his godly, spacey take on shoegaze. If you haven't heard the live version of Gravity Grave on Voyager 1, you have no idea what you are missing.

As for Urban Hymns, I suppose it's no surprise The Rolling People is my second-favourite track because it recalls early Verve so well, and I'll challenge LM in that it's exactly the length it should be. The only song on the album better than it is Space And Time, simply because very little tops that gorgeous guitar melody. (LM, I'd also like to take issue with you re: Come On.)

Given how big Urban Hymns was - it was fucking unavoidable in Australia and New Zealand, even my mother bought a copy - I reckon that if they had released a fourth album promptly, and if it had another couple of similarly successful singles, well they'd be pretty fucking famous by now. But I'm with those people who say that the whole "biggest band in the world" thing that U2 like to claim now is pretty much a dead concept for current artists. I like it that way, myself. I wish U2 and their fans had never had this "biggest band in the world" penis measuring contest to fetishise.

As a footnote, given the options suggested in the original post, I was stunned to see that the Foo Fighters are doing a stadium tour of Australia later this year. I had no idea they are that big down here; hell, I was barely conscious that they are still active. Though it seems they are only able to play stadiums due to booking popular supports with sizable Aussie fanbases of their own (Tenacious D, Manchester Orchestra, The Living End). Shit, popular supports? Cue Moggio.
 
I need to challenge the idea that Oasis never "broke" in the US. Morning Glory sold over four million albums here, and "Wonderwall" and "Champagne Supernova" were both on constant rotation on MTV and radio. Hell, I still hear those two fairly often on the radio. Oasis just failed to sustain the momentum that they had accomplished.

Let me clarify: my point was that their live shows here did not win them many new fans, mainly because of their attitudes. They had a hit album but as you said, couldn't sustain the momentum.

The third album being an overblown piece of shit didn't help, either.

And what Axver said above it what I was getting at. Because they were able to follow-up Urban Hymns in any kind of realistic time frame (and as I said earlier, because their touring of Urban Hymns was cut short), they weren't really able to make a run at the big time.

BTW, The Rolling People is what they opened the show I saw with, and it melted my fucking face off.

Nice to see the love for Space & Time and Weeping Willow. Though it's a shame no one has mentioned The Drugs Don't Work. It's simple, but a very powerful ballad that should have been HUGE.
 
Of all the bands mentioned at the start of this thread, Muse definitely gave me a 'what?' moment.

Lest we forget, those guys have been around for over a decade too. You'd think it would happen by now, if it was going to happen. Not to say they aren't a highly successful band (more's the pity; I loathe everything that they are).
 
The Verve are great, and I echo the sentiment that they don't sound as quintessentially British as a lot of other British bands. My first introduction to them was the Bittersweet Symphony video clip, and that is very British, but if I shut out everything else I know about the band, and just think of their sound, they could be from anywhere, US, Ireland or South Africa or whatever. There isn't much of an English accent to be detected in Ashcroft's vocal.

I'll also echo LemonMelon in how long and plodding some of the songs are on Urban Hymns (sorry Vlad), Rolling People and Come On meander somewhat for me.. But not as badly as Noise Epic and Numbness do on Forth.

Weeping Willow, Sonnet.. Fantastic, and the brilliance tucked away in the twilight of the album, Velvet Morning, This Time, Lucky Man
 
I wish U2 and their fans had never had this "biggest band in the world" penis measuring contest to fetishise.

It is wholly idiotic and I don't know why some fans care so much about it, especially to the point where they happily cheer-lead that aspect of their career as being 'understandably' more important than other aspects, like, I dunno, creativity.

But yes, for a number of reasons (or mix of reasons) it is or will be impossible for a band (or group of any other genre) to ever reach U2-size.

But even if it were, the four mentioned originally - Muse/Coldplay/Elbow/Arcade Fire - wouldn't be the ones to do it anyway. They're all limited in some way. If you actually look at U2's career, you're looking at a band that is a kind of mix of Arcade Fire and Coldplay. I obviously don't mean directly, but in their positioning and appeal. Arcade Fire's rise, talent, uniqueness (or 'newness') and 'creative excitement' thus far, but with far more splashes of Coldplay popularism. I mean, The Suburbs didn't have a Pride, and even if their next album is a critical 'Joshua Tree', it's almost certainly not going to have a With or Without You. Meanwhile, Coldplay, as universal as they are (and you need to reach very, very, very wide - hence why Muse, or the also mentioned Foo Fighters, are the very first you can eliminate) don't have any great sense of critical or creative excitement about them. They might deliver a very good Coldplay album. It might even be a far greater 'hit' than any previous Coldplay album. They might have huge appeal - and they do, I would think it should be absolutely obvious to all but the most blinkered U2 fans that Coldplay easily out reach U2 these days - but they're not going to amaze. Arcade Fire will probably amaze, but they probably won't appeal. You need both.
 
I'll also echo LemonMelon in how long and plodding some of the songs are on Urban Hymns (sorry Vlad), Rolling People and Come On meander somewhat for me.. But not as badly as Noise Epic and Numbness do on Forth.

No, I actually do agree with some of the album's songs being too long! It's just I believe that both of these songs are two of the album's best.
 
fuck big band status.... not every band will make the world want to explode with excitement.

its all about everyone pissing in the same room now.

















Right now I cant think of a band :D:D

there are very very few who have had the luxury of having such status.
like Beatles, Spice Girls.....I think Foo and RHCP would be bigger in America???
 
I think that your suggestion of Muse if a definite! I saw them last year and they blew my pea brain and my ears! They're music is quite angry and angsty without sounding like spoilt brats
 
...and that's about as far from Britpop as you can get.

We can go back and forth about how great (or less-than-great) they were, but I'm saying there was a universality in the music that broke them out of that genre more often than their contemporaries.

I admit to being no student of the genre, just getting the singles here and there from most bands during its heyday, and later getting into a select few artists actual albums. But barring certain songs, and albums it's not something I spend a lot of time with. Travis was the one Britpop band I actually latched onto for good.
 
I dont really think of Travis as being Britpop. They're British and they play pop music, but Britpop, they are not
 
i doubt that any of the bands mentioned or bands these days aspire to the "biggest band" mantle. if coldplay, muse, foo fighters, etc wanted that title as much as u2 wanted it they would have already been on their way. as mentioned earlier pearl jam and radiohead were the most likely to follow in u2's footsteps but decided not too.
u2 is the last of their kind.
 
The internet has probably played no small part in ensuring the "biggest band on the planet" thing will be pretty antiquated once Shuttlecock does the right thing and hangs em up.
 
The world will be a better place when swooncore does the right thing and drowns in its own tears.
 
All I'm saying is there's a reason Seinfeld and the Beatles are such sacred cows.

And re: the stupid swooncore joke, I'd take any of those albums over the garbage Shuttlecock have fed the public for the past ten years.
 
i doubt that any of the bands mentioned or bands these days aspire to the "biggest band" mantle. if coldplay, muse, foo fighters, etc wanted that title as much as u2 wanted it they would have already been on their way. as mentioned earlier pearl jam and radiohead were the most likely to follow in u2's footsteps but decided not too.
u2 is the last of their kind.

Wanting it is only part of it.

Thom Yorke's voice is too divisive, I doubt Radiohead could have even if they wanted it.

Pearl Jam, as great as they are, don't have the range.

Foo Fighters...I'm not even going to comment. No way.
 
Back
Top Bottom