How good is U2?

[RademR]

It's hard to compare Bono's lyric-writing to yesterdays. They make pop music now, plain and simple. To me, The lyrics to "The Wanderer" won't fit a pop tune.

but i agree, his writing has taken a slight dive in the last couple albums. Some of it it seems like he did on the spot.

i wouldn't say he was drunk, he must have been pretty pissed during a lot of the AB writing sessions and look how great those lyrics came out. But if he was a little tipsy when he wrote "some people have skyscrapers on their backs", then he needs to put down the guiness.

its not like he doesnt have brilliant writing skills.

anyway, u2 are in my top 5 and always will be. But it is subjective. Although, if a rock fan doesn't have them in their top 20, sparks will fly

 

[Sunny69]

I've been to a pub and got drunk, having a good time listening to the tunes on the jukebox. I hear Zeppelin, or Floyd and I think thats fuckin cool, rockin shit. But then I hear a U2 song like Streets and it just takes me to another level. To me U2 are in their own league at the very top. As far as them not being technically good as other musicians, I don't think it matters. Like someone said Larry is a military style drummer and I'd rather listen to his grooves then some dude thrashing at a million miles an hour and not taking the song anywhere.

 

[Pero]

they are that good that with album which didn't come even close to their maximum potential got 8 grammy awards

 

[Irvine511]

i think Bono is right -- loosely paraphrased, they've created emotions in rock music that didn't exist before they created them. they use their instruments as a means of access to emotional terrain. other bands might impress me more than U2 (zepplein), other bands might write more beautiful songs than U2 (REM), other bands might write more perfect songs than U2 (Beatles), other bands might reflect real experience better than U2 (Springsteen), but no one gives you that head-to-toe feeling of full-bodied emotional release that U2 does at their best.

i think a great example of this is in "sometimes." when bono sings "don't leave me here alone" and how his voice goes down into self-pitying sadness and frailty, while edge hits two or three simple but stark and clear and icy and soaring notes over the despair, it creates a very complex emotional reaction that i can't find anywhere else -- they musically reconcile seemingly opposite emotions (love/fear, God/sex, plastic/soul, despair/joy) and reveal them to be opposite sides of the same coin, and that one is a way to relieve the other.

i would say that U2 are the most emotionally complex and sophistocated rock band in history, and no band has sought to make more meaning out of modern existence than U2.

 

[jonnytakeawalk]

i think Bono is right -- loosely paraphrased, they've created emotions in rock music that didn't exist before they created them. they use their instruments as a means of access to emotional terrain. other bands might impress me more than U2 (zepplein), other bands might write more beautiful songs than U2 (REM), other bands might write more perfect songs than U2 (Beatles), other bands might reflect real experience better than U2 (Springsteen), but no one gives you that head-to-toe feeling of full-bodied emotional release that U2 does at their best.

i think a great example of this is in "sometimes." when bono sings "don't leave me here alone" and how his voice goes down into self-pitying sadness and frailty, while edge hits two or three simple but stark and clear and icy and soaring notes over the despair, it creates a very complex emotional reaction that i can't find anywhere else -- they musically reconcile seemingly opposite emotions (love/fear, God/sex, plastic/soul, despair/joy) and reveal them to be opposite sides of the same coin, and that one is a way to relieve the other.

i would say that U2 are the most emotionally complex and sophistocated rock band in history, and no band has sought to make more meaning out of modern existence than U2.

WOW

No need to continue this thread. Irvine's answered the question perfectly

 

[Yahweh_OMG]

 

[Aygo]

This is so subjective that I don't know why the thread opened. It's a subject thatll always lead to stupid discussions and we're tired to know what opinion belong to who...

 

[Irvine511]

This is so subjective that I don't know why the thread opened. It's a subject thatll always lead to stupid discussions and we're tired to know what opinion belong to who...

yes, why discuss anything.

except the fact that the only good album U2 has ever done is Pop and everything else is manufactured crap designed for 11 year old girls who live in Peoria, IL.

 

[Aygo]

yes, why discuss anything.

except the fact that the only good album U2 has ever done is Pop and everything else is manufactured crap designed for 11 year old girls who live in Peoria, IL.

Exactily. I don't anything more to say.

 

[Yahweh_OMG]

 

[Irvine511]

Exactily. I don't anything more to say.

keep thinking hard.

i'm sure you'll come up with something.

 

[Zoots]

Aygo and Irvine, I thought you guys both agreed on the 00s.

 

[adrball]

i would say that U2 are the most emotionally complex and sophistocated rock band in history, and no band has sought to make more meaning out of modern existence than U2.

Right on the money

...makes mental note for future use...

 

[Reggie Thee Dog]

U2 is the 'only' true Band in the history of rock...everyone else broke up or changed members at some point in their careers.

Musically U2 is complexly simple. As someone said earlier in this thread, they are a true example of the sum of all (of slightly above average) parts = greatness. No one will ever buy an Edge or Adam Clayton DVD on how to play guitar/bass, but they've cranked out some memorable riffs in their lifetime.

And who said Larry's the weak link? Crazy talk. Larry is the Ringo of his time!

 

[Sunny69]

A large part of the U2 Interference Forum is subjective discussion - thats why it's interesting - of course musical preference is not objective - its the diverse opinions, ideas from people of all generations, genres and parts of the world that make the discussions interesting. This thread is as relevent as any other in this forum

 

[Irvine511]

Aygo and Irvine, I thought you guys both agreed on the 00s.

i love '00s U2.

i prefer the Zoo era, but whatever.



ATYCLB is a solid #4 on my album list, after the usual suspects and Boy.

 

[Aygo]

Well, I'm known for my HTDAAB love, but I love all eras and all album, not putting down any of them.

 

[Aygo]

keep thinking hard.

i'm sure you'll come up with something.

I don't have much more to say in a thread that will never in this world be consensual. My opinion in not very hard: U2 is great, they're different, they have been breaking conventions that no-one else did, they're as big as The Beatles for several reasons, etc etc... don't need to explain this more...

 

[Irvine511]

Well, I'm known for my HTDAAB love, but I love all eras and all album, not putting down any of them.

i may have had you confused with someone else.

if so, i apologize.

 

[IanIinTheSky]

Re: Re: How good is U2?

Hmm. In a purely technical sense, U2's frankly not very good at all. My first level would include bands such as Porcupine Tree, Pure Reason Revolution, Dream Theater, and Orphaned Land, and in comparison, U2 just doesn't register on the radar, or if they do, it's due to riding on Edge's back.

Are those bands even real?

They sound like bad Neil Diamond songs.

 

[Aygo]

i may have had you confused with someone else.

if so, i apologize.

That's okay. Happy Xmas, by the way

 

[vaz02]

1st Tier

led zeppelin
the beatles
the rolling stones
Queeen
u2
Pink Floyd

 

[mads]

i think Bono is right -- loosely paraphrased, they've created emotions in rock music that didn't exist before they created them. they use their instruments as a means of access to emotional terrain. other bands might impress me more than U2 (zepplein), other bands might write more beautiful songs than U2 (REM), other bands might write more perfect songs than U2 (Beatles), other bands might reflect real experience better than U2 (Springsteen), but no one gives you that head-to-toe feeling of full-bodied emotional release that U2 does at their best.

i think a great example of this is in "sometimes." when bono sings "don't leave me here alone" and how his voice goes down into self-pitying sadness and frailty, while edge hits two or three simple but stark and clear and icy and soaring notes over the despair, it creates a very complex emotional reaction that i can't find anywhere else -- they musically reconcile seemingly opposite emotions (love/fear, God/sex, plastic/soul, despair/joy) and reveal them to be opposite sides of the same coin, and that one is a way to relieve the other.

i would say that U2 are the most emotionally complex and sophistocated rock band in history, and no band has sought to make more meaning out of modern existence than U2.

You could not possibly have said that better.

 

[dazzlingamy]

SUBJECTIVE.

I think U2 are bloody amazing. I love the music, I love the concerts, I love the friendship/love, I love the lyrics, I love everything. That is why I love U2.

Some of those other bands, Pink Floyd, The Doors, REM, Radiohead etc, do nothing for me. I don't like their music, I find their songs boring. So I would put U2 way ahead of these bands, but *GASP* im sure people don't agree.

I just think there is a peer pressure subjectivity to saying who you "love" and im not going to bend to it!

 

[MrBrau1]

You could not possibly have said that better.

Irvine is great.

He really "gets" it.

 

[rihannsu]

i think Bono is right -- loosely paraphrased, they've created emotions in rock music that didn't exist before they created them. they use their instruments as a means of access to emotional terrain. other bands might impress me more than U2 (zepplein), other bands might write more beautiful songs than U2 (REM), other bands might write more perfect songs than U2 (Beatles), other bands might reflect real experience better than U2 (Springsteen), but no one gives you that head-to-toe feeling of full-bodied emotional release that U2 does at their best.

i think a great example of this is in "sometimes." when bono sings "don't leave me here alone" and how his voice goes down into self-pitying sadness and frailty, while edge hits two or three simple but stark and clear and icy and soaring notes over the despair, it creates a very complex emotional reaction that i can't find anywhere else -- they musically reconcile seemingly opposite emotions (love/fear, God/sex, plastic/soul, despair/joy) and reveal them to be opposite sides of the same coin, and that one is a way to relieve the other.

i would say that U2 are the most emotionally complex and sophistocated rock band in history, and no band has sought to make more meaning out of modern existence than U2.

Bravo, beautifully stated. I think the problem is that U2's music is meant to be experienced, not analyzed. The consistancy of the emotional impact of their songs throughout their career cannot be matched. I think sometimes when people don't like a song it is more because it is affecting them emotionally in a way that is not appealing to them. For instance I couldn't stand Electrical Storm at first, it totally rubbed me the wrong way. Later I realized that I liked the last parts of the song but still didn't like the beginning. Then I read what Bono said about the song being about the nervous tension that is so prevalent since 9/11 and it suddenly clicked that the song is doing exactly what Bono wanted, making you feel tense and on edge like an electrical storm but the song ends with the tensions sort of smoothed out so it conveys the hope of better times. Once I understood that it changed the way I reacted to the song.

Dana

 

[allbecauseofu2]

i love u2,. but know thier place in music. I know that until realy realy recently, thier not realy a big influence musicaly on any bands. Thier sound was uniqe. U2 is not quite up thier with the "rock gods" listed in this thread, they are second tier. As far as radio play. Thier like a "miniture" classic rock group. I also consider u2 to be a alterative rock group. one of the best alt bands ever. Thier roots are in punk and post punk, etc. they do not sound like classic rock. but also, i know thier not "the" best alt band ever,. cause thats nirvana. I think u2 blows away other second tier classic rock groups like crosby stills & nash, jefferson airplane,kiss, the byrds, beach boys, the kinks, rod stewart, etc. no offense to those bands, cauuse i like some of them, but yeah not in the same leauge. Yet i know the world dosn;t think u2 is in the same leauge of the rock gods, like the who, pink floyd, eagles, zeppelin,beatles,billy joel, the boss, elton john, doors, stones, etc. so thier ya go. Bob dylan is kinda is in his own catgory. santana is also in his own catgory cause why , carlos santana is a guitar legend, the band itself, as "santana" wasn;t quite in the level of the "rock gods" as far as sales or just staight up not getting overplayed quite as much as they were. Then supernataural came out and that litreraly moved santana into another level. rewrote/added to his legacy. the other rock gods legacys have been written in stone for years. And new albums, have not added to the legacy (whos new album, any stone album since 1982) of any of these groups. of course some broke up or died and stopped making music. u get the point.

 

[Yahweh]

The most over rated band in the history of music is The Beatles, and I own all of their albums and have heard them many many times.

There were many bands even in The Beatles time period that were making music as good as The Beatles but The Beatles were the ones that broke through in America though massive promotion on TV and radio. They are an amazing band but I will say they are also the most over rated band in the history of music not just rock music.

U2 will always be undervalued and underapprciated by the average joe blow music fan, because the music has a consistancy that you do not hear every day, it is written very much differently then what you would normally hear because U2 play to their strengths which are different then most other bands who start off getting very technical with their insterment before they make music. U2 started the other way around making music before they learned how to play their insterment. There are many technically sound or near perfect technical bands out their but the majority of them are boring as hell.

U2 is about emotion and have been ever since they started in the gyms of Dublin high school parties. Even on the studio recordings they are about capturing emotion and thats what makes them the best for me and U2 will always be the best because they make the music jump off the page out of your speakers and fill the room with emotion and consistancy as long as you are willing to hear it.

 

[xaviMF22]

U2 started the other way around making music before they learned how to play their insterment.

this is why I love U2

 

[Yahweh_OMG]

Well said Yahweh !!!! You wrote my thoughts, thanks....