Some one who finally gets it right

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
:lol:


i thought it was bad when the barenaked ladies put one out after 10 years.
 
IWasBored said:
:lol:


i thought it was bad when the barenaked ladies put one out after 10 years.

Actually, I think 10 years is a pretty good point for a retrospective... but imagine One Disc: All Their Greatest Hits with "Another Postcard" and "Maybe Katie" :drool:
 
I've always thought a distinction needs to be made between a Best Of and a Greatest Hits collection. It's my understanding that a Greatest Hits should contain the songs that have performed best on the charts (and should probably only be released by a band that's had many chart successes over an extended period of time), while a Best Of is simply a collection of the BEST material of the band (of course, this is subjective, but anyway ...) and can be released by anyone with a decent back catalogue regardless of chart performance in order to bring together their material as an introduction to the casual fan and general market.

But maybe that's just me being pedantic and it doesn't work that way ... :shrug:
 
Axver said:
I've always thought a distinction needs to be made between a Best Of and a Greatest Hits collection. It's my understanding that a Greatest Hits should contain the songs that have performed best on the charts (and should probably only be released by a band that's had many chart successes over an extended period of time), while a Best Of is simply a collection of the BEST material of the band (of course, this is subjective, but anyway ...) and can be released by anyone with a decent back catalogue regardless of chart performance in order to bring together their material as an introduction to the casual fan and general market.

But maybe that's just me being pedantic and it doesn't work that way ... :shrug:

I agree. That's how I always think of the terms. A band with a large back catalog, but not a huge number of hits, can still put out a very nice retrospective album. Greatest hits should be just that.
 
Do you think Hilary Duff had anything to do with her own greatest hits/best of/$-grabber? I don't. She's just an impressionable little 16-17 year old girl who I would imagine is as ditzy and lacking-intellect as any 16-17 year old white bread kid would be, who would go along with anything if the record company told her she would make more money, get to play dress up and preform in front of cameras more, etc. I don't think Hilary Duff has any real musical talent, but I don't hold this ridiculousness against her either. I hold it against the record company.
 
UnforgettableLemon said:


Actually, I think 10 years is a pretty good point for a retrospective... but imagine One Disc: All Their Greatest Hits with "Another Postcard" and "Maybe Katie" :drool:

i was just really happy to see shoe box on it.
 
Back
Top Bottom