Strange Dylan-U2 comparison please...

[TheFlyOnTheWall]

The last few days I'm really hooked up on the song Like A Rolling Stone, so I was wondering if there are any songs from the new album that are as great, or even greater (!) as that one....
Yeah, strange quesiton, but I haven't heard the album yet, so I'm listening to all kinds of other music...

 

[If you shout...]

You're talking about what is probably one of the ten or fifteen greatest songs in the history of contemporary/recorded music, here--so, NO. Nothing on this album can hope to approach the level at which "Like a Rolling Stone" rests. Some of the tracks here are among the best that U2 has ever recorded, I think (though there are a few lesser songs and one of their worst, I'd say), but certainly not among the best EVER recorded.

Dylan's "Like a Rolling Stone," "Visions of Johanna," "Tangled Up in Blue," and "If You See Her, Say Hello"--if not several others--all still have an insurmountable lead over all these new songs as far as greatness goes. Just my opinion, but there it is. This album is not classic in the sense of Dylan's greatest music.

 

[mkjc]

The last few days I'm really hooked up on the song Like A Rolling Stone, so I was wondering if there are any songs from the new album that are as great, or even greater (!) as that one....
Yeah, strange quesiton, but I haven't heard the album yet, so I'm listening to all kinds of other music...

Hmm. It would be like comparing Apples and Giraffes.

BTW, did you ever notice that the begining of Angel of Harlem sounds a lot like the beginning of Like a Rolling Stone?

 

[TheFlyOnTheWall]

Re: Re: Strange Dylan-U2 comparison please...

Hmm. It would be like comparing Apples and Giraffes.

BTW, did you ever notice that the begining of Angel of Harlem sounds a lot like the beginning of Like a Rolling Stone?

Yeah, it really is similair... [now that i compare them]

I was wondering why don't U2 make such classics... Maybe it's just that kind of music. Like, Homers Odyssey is a classic that, let's say Clarke's Odyssey 2001 (etc.) will never be. But then again, to me, the first one is "nothing" compared to the other one...
So, Homer would be Dylan, and Clarke - Bono (fine with me )

 

[iota]

I love U2 dearly, but Bob Dylan is leagues beyond everybody.

 

[kakvox]

I love U2 dearly, but Bob Dylan is leagues beyond everybody.

He isn't necessarily beyond U2, just different, IMO.

 

[Bono's shades]

I consider songs like Pride, Sunday Bloody Sunday, Streets and One to be the Like a Rolling Stone/Blowing in the Wind/Tangled Up in Blue of my generation. But as far as songs on the new album? As much as I like the new album, I kind of doubt it.

 

[U2Nut95]

I love U2 dearly, but Bob Dylan is leagues beyond everybody.

I gotta agree with this. I'm a huge U2 fan and really started with U2 & REM, but Dylan is just beyond comparison to anyone. He transcends genres and deserves to be called one of the greatest poets of the 20th Century, if not the greatest.

That's not to say U2 isn't great - they are and are on the level of the Stones, the Beatles, and the Who, but Dylan is beyond all of them.

 

[Sleep Over Jack]

I disagree...lyrically, yes, Dylan is better than anyone and massively influenced tons of artists/bands, but I think he often sacrifices a good tune for cramming long-winded (though excellent) lyrics into a song. I'd take the Stones and Beatles tunes over his anyday.

 

[U2Nut95]

I disagree...lyrically, yes, Dylan is better than anyone and massively influenced tons of artists/bands, but I think he often sacrifices a good tune for cramming long-winded (though excellent) lyrics into a song. I'd take the Stones and Beatles tunes over his anyday.

We can agree to disagree. I think Bob's melodies are spectacular, especially when he works them to cram words in. There are plenty of songs where Bob is not anywhere near as verbose. His early career was more the wordsmith, but he came up with same great melody lines in the 70s, some of them while telling intricate stories (think Tangled up in Blue). Dylan is the total package in my mind. While it is my opinion, I think there is no one who can compete with Dylan as the greatest artist of the rock'n'roll era. Most other musicians I know agree with me on that one.

 

[Sleep Over Jack]

Well if musicians agree with you that must mean something..


But seriously, I just find bands like The Beatles, Stones, Kinks etc so much more memorable than Dylan as a whole, not just limiting it to lyrics but the whole package, vocals, energy, musical innovation, good lyrics..

 

[rkman]

Why exactly is Dylan's music superior to the Beatles or the Stones? Dylan has made a ton of great music, but I'd prefer to listen to the Beatles or Stones anyday.

As far as this album goes, I think it's too early to say whether it's songs will or will not be classics in the vein of "Like a Rolling Stone." Probably the one that has the best chance would be COBL. The thing is, songs don't become classics until they've stood the test of time for a couple of decades at least. I'm sure back when "Like a Rolling Stone" had only been out for a couple of years, people thought of it as an exceptional song, but not a classic at that time. So who's to say if any of these songs will somehow gain this status? Only time will tell for sure.

 

[Sleep Over Jack]

An immortal post rkman, I agree with all points!