mikal said:
mikal said:
u2popmofo said:
angelordevil said:
u2popmofo said:
The issue lies in the fact that the vast majority of you dont seem to see U2 doing this same type of thing all the time. I wouldnt mind the soap box if it was followed by a critique of U2. They generally seem to channel another group/genre of music/past sound/or even themselves on at least 3 tracks from every album (or make some cover song where they just straight up play the original). Some could even argue that on their first 2 albums they were nothing other than a Television wannabe group.
If other groups/artists should be ridiculed and attacked for doing something that someone else has done before, how on earth do any of you even tolerate U2? This is point I, and everyone else who thinks these comparisons are ridiculous, is trying to make is that when it comes down to it, U2 themselves are not exactly original. Then again, who is? Rock music has been around for far too long to really think that everything or anything that a group is doing or will do will be remotely original. Lets face it, U2 and Coldplay are both mainstream pop rock bands. You'd be hard pressed to continue to maintain any type of mainstream popularity if you did try to do something that was ACTUALLY original (I'm sorry, but if you tried you could easily find bands, albums, songs, and even genres of music that all came before things like Achtung Baby, Zooropa, Passengers, Pop, etc. that were extremely similar to what U2 did). If your major hook up on not liking Coldplay (or whatever band it may be) is that they are similar or influenced by something in the past, U2 should almost be #1 on your list of bands to hate.
That all being said, who cares? I personally can still like mainstream pop rock bands such as U2 and Coldplay for what they ARE good at, making enjoyable and catchy music that doesnt insult your intelligence or ears to listen to and you can actually hear on the radio or discuss it with your general friends who dont listen to anything outside of the mainstream spectrum. Heck, I'll be the first to admit that U2 IS actually still my favorite band of all time. At the same time, I dont fault ANYONE for absolutely hating U2 (or Coldplay). Music, or any art, all just has far too much to do with personal opinion and taste to ever be able to act like it can be black or white. Being a 'great band' is all just a personal opinion or personal frame of reference.
Anyways, my rant/opinions/lame speech is over. My apologies to anyone who actually read it.
Headache in a Suitcase said:
Surprise surprise, there was one already made. I like Coldplay a lot, but I really have to wonder how far they're going to take this "hey, let's be like U2!" kick they're currently on. The lighting may just be a coincidence (and YES u2popmofo, we all know U2 didn't invent the concept of flashing lightbulbs) but you have to admit - it's pretty darn similar. And Chris Martin's mannerisms on camera just scream "Bono". As for the song itself, if you replaced Chris' voice with Bono's, it'd be a U2 song.
Iskra said:
Iskra said:
u2popmofo said:
The issue lies in the fact that the vast majority of you dont seem to see U2 doing this same type of thing all the time. I wouldnt mind the soap box if it was followed by a critique of U2. They generally seem to channel another group/genre of music/past sound/or even themselves on at least 3 tracks from every album (or make some cover song where they just straight up play the original). Some could even argue that on their first 2 albums they were nothing other than a Television wannabe group.
If other groups/artists should be ridiculed and attacked for doing something that someone else has done before, how on earth do any of you even tolerate U2? This is point I, and everyone else who thinks these comparisons are ridiculous, is trying to make is that when it comes down to it, U2 themselves are not exactly original. Then again, who is? Rock music has been around for far too long to really think that everything or anything that a group is doing or will do will be remotely original. Lets face it, U2 and Coldplay are both mainstream pop rock bands. You'd be hard pressed to continue to maintain any type of mainstream popularity if you did try to do something that was ACTUALLY original (I'm sorry, but if you tried you could easily find bands, albums, songs, and even genres of music that all came before things like Achtung Baby, Zooropa, Passengers, Pop, etc. that were extremely similar to what U2 did). If your major hook up on not liking Coldplay (or whatever band it may be) is that they are similar or influenced by something in the past, U2 should almost be #1 on your list of bands to hate.
That all being said, who cares? I personally can still like mainstream pop rock bands such as U2 and Coldplay for what they ARE good at, making enjoyable and catchy music that doesnt insult your intelligence or ears to listen to and you can actually hear on the radio or discuss it with your general friends who dont listen to anything outside of the mainstream spectrum. Heck, I'll be the first to admit that U2 IS actually still my favorite band of all time. At the same time, I dont fault ANYONE for absolutely hating U2 (or Coldplay). Music, or any art, all just has far too much to do with personal opinion and taste to ever be able to act like it can be black or white. Being a 'great band' is all just a personal opinion or personal frame of reference.
Anyways, my rant/opinions/lame speech is over. My apologies to anyone who actually read it.
U2girl said:
u2popmofo said:
The issue lies in the fact that the vast majority of you dont seem to see U2 doing this same type of thing all the time. I wouldnt mind the soap box if it was followed by a critique of U2. They generally seem to channel another group/genre of music/past sound/or even themselves on at least 3 tracks from every album (or make some cover song where they just straight up play the original). Some could even argue that on their first 2 albums they were nothing other than a Television wannabe group.
If other groups/artists should be ridiculed and attacked for doing something that someone else has done before, how on earth do any of you even tolerate U2? This is point I, and everyone else who thinks these comparisons are ridiculous, is trying to make is that when it comes down to it, U2 themselves are not exactly original. Then again, who is? Rock music has been around for far too long to really think that everything or anything that a group is doing or will do will be remotely original. Lets face it, U2 and Coldplay are both mainstream pop rock bands. You'd be hard pressed to continue to maintain any type of mainstream popularity if you did try to do something that was ACTUALLY original (I'm sorry, but if you tried you could easily find bands, albums, songs, and even genres of music that all came before things like Achtung Baby, Zooropa, Passengers, Pop, etc. that were extremely similar to what U2 did). If your major hook up on not liking Coldplay (or whatever band it may be) is that they are similar or influenced by something in the past, U2 should almost be #1 on your list of bands to hate.
That all being said, who cares? I personally can still like mainstream pop rock bands such as U2 and Coldplay for what they ARE good at, making enjoyable and catchy music that doesnt insult your intelligence or ears to listen to and you can actually hear on the radio or discuss it with your general friends who dont listen to anything outside of the mainstream spectrum. Heck, I'll be the first to admit that U2 IS actually still my favorite band of all time. At the same time, I dont fault ANYONE for absolutely hating U2 (or Coldplay). Music, or any art, all just has far too much to do with personal opinion and taste to ever be able to act like it can be black or white. Being a 'great band' is all just a personal opinion or personal frame of reference.
Anyways, my rant/opinions/lame speech is over. My apologies to anyone who actually read it.
u2popmofo said:
U2girl said:
