Is U2 the Opera/Classical act of the Pop/Rock genre?

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

Yahweh

Rock n' Roll Doggie
Joined
Nov 7, 2004
Messages
3,478
Location
Canada
Do you think it takes a certain level of intelligence to truly appreciate, love and admire U2’s music and U2’s spirit?

I have heard Classical and Opera music being called the music of the civilized and I think to a certain extent that is true because it does take a level of open mindedness to really get into and understand that variety of music.

I find the same thing is true with U2’s music because as long as I have been a fan of U2 there has always been people out there that have never understood what U2 is on about. As much as I would like to see everybody like U2 I just don’t think it is possible because people that genuinely love U2, which is the majority of this forum have to have a certain mindset of being stretched and tested which most people don’t like to have.

I find that the majority of people these days don’t like to be challenged when listening to music and that is I think where most people are missing the point when it comes to U2. I find that most people just don’t take the music they listen to seriously enough and that’s why U2 while being in the mainstream has always been in the slipstream at the same time.

Going back to my original point though I think listening to U2 for a Pop/Rock act in a genre filled with throw away music takes a certain level of intelligence that I have only truly found in the hardcore U2 fan following.

What do you guys think do you find it hard to relate to other people that you know just aren’t hearing the music the way it should be heard?
 
I actually think U2 are an emotional band not an intellectual one. I dont feel they are particularly highbrow at all. Quite the opposite actually.

If people prefer to listen to whatevers in the charts it might be appealing to their age group, clique, clothing styles, etc. Many things, including different emotional substance eg anger.

So, I disagree. I dont think it takes more intelligence to like U2. I dont correlate U2 to classical or opera. To me bands like Pink Floyd with all their Dark Side of the Moon sit-in-the-right-spot-to-hear-it music is more equivalent to classical music.

U2 are a band that appeal to my emotions.
 
No. I don't find U2's music particularly intellectually stimulating. It touches emotion more than intellect. And now I'm going to sound like an incredible snob, but if U2 was rock's equivalent to classical or opera, they wouldn't be nearly as popular as they are.

OK...y'all can blast me now. ;)
 
I say U2 are both the thinking and feeling person's band. Songs like Bullet and SBS make you think about politics; songs like One touch you deep inside your soul.

I do agree you need to use your brain to fully understand U2.
 
For me, U2 music is more about the heart and emotions than the brain; and the reason many people aren't into U2 is IMO more of a matter of taste rather than intellect. And people have different ways of listening to music too: for non-English speakers who have no idea what Bono is on about in Bullet the Blue Sky, lyrics probably have very little meaning and the power of the song is felt through music alone.

And many classical music lovers I know would probably be HORRIFIED if they heard U2 compared to Beethoven, :)
 
U2 definitely an emotional band not an intellectual band but these can leave you feeling cold........
 
No. That distinction would to the the progressive rock bands.

U2 makes pop music that have cracking tunes and appeal to the greatest number including the teenyboppers (especially with ATYCLB and now HTDAAB).

Other acts require a certain level of intelligence and appreciation to get the song. Not U2. U2 music is for everyone of all sexes and ages.

The difference being U2's music has so many layers of meaning that the more intelligent and appreciative you are, the more meaning you will discover in the song.

Cheers,

J
 
The one flaw in all of this is that classical music as well as opera are also highly emotional. Maybe this music isn't for everyone, but to those who can appreciate at least some of it, it is incredibly powerful, not because of what it makes you think of, but how it makes you feel. It can truly touch the depth of your soul. And in that capacity, U2 is similar.

As for U2 being intellectual - I'm hard-pressed to say this of any pop/rap/R&B/rock artist. Even some opera isn't all that intellecual. However, comparatively, I would say U2 is far more intellectual than most of their counterparts simply due to the multiple ways Bono's lyrics can be interpreted. His poetic skills add that extra level often missing in a lot of music.
 
I agree with Jick :ohmy:

I've always thought that Radiohead is a lot like classical music.
 
I don't exactly remember when I read this, but a few years back, some company came up with a computer program that tried to compare the stylistics of many musical acts, and found that U2 and Beethoven were very similar. Anyone remember what this was?
 
Yep. See http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BFU/is_4_90/ai_n6355569


From http://hometown.aol.co.uk/imaginareality/hss.html:

A company in Spain, called Polyphonic HMI have developed a new piece of software for the music business. It is known as HSS, or Hit Song Science. Its function is to analyse music, putting it through filters to identify various patterns of rhythm, melody, chord structure, tempo, and various other qualities of harmony, dynamics and timbre. It then breaks the piece down into a system of raw numbers. Apparently, for example, Beethoven and U2 come out with similar values. Sounds interesting so far, the kind of thing that musicologists would find very useful.
 
Last edited:
I've realised that you can't be stupid to be a u2 fan, because it takes some knowledge to understand their lyrics. You just can't be a Britney Spears and u2 fan in the same time becase you see that there is some big difference in songs.
As B.B.King said:"You're too young to write such puwerful lyrics."
 
I've never understood why classical music is supposed to be highly intellectual or difficult to get into. I've loved classical music ever since I was a little kid. What is there to "get" about a beautiful melody? Sure, there's lots of music geeks out there who go on and on about harmonic scales or whatever (is that even a real term or did I just make it up?) when talking about classical music, but I know next to nothing about that stuff and I still love listening to Mozart, Bach and Beethoven - as well as U2 and tons of other popular artists.

I'm not sure how "intellectual" U2 are. I guess it's all relative. They are probably the musical equivalent of Einstein when you compare them to most stuff that gets played on the radio, but it's not like you need a high IQ to be into the band. Some of Bono's lyrics can mean two or three things at once, so there is a certain complexity there (well, at least there used to be - he's a lot more straightforward these days) but lots of people don't pay much attention to lyrics anyway.
 
Pero said:
I've realised that you can't be stupid to be a u2 fan, because it takes some knowledge to understand their lyrics. You just can't be a Britney Spears and u2 fan in the same time becase you see that there is some big difference in songs.
As B.B.King said:"You're too young to write such puwerful lyrics."

Oh, I don't think this is necessarily true, but I understand what you are saying. I love Mötley Crüe's stuff, but if only for a primal release (you know it's a "guy" thing), however I completely identify with U2 more than the Crüe.

And I think that Jick's post was a thing of beauty. He capture in a few short sentences the essence of U2's music and lyrics.

U2 mean something different to each one of us. Accessible yes, boring and prententious...I don't believe so.
 
U2 are one of the most intelligent bands, because they are one of the few to combine the personal, the political and the spiritual.
 
Back
Top Bottom