U2 and Bon Jovi: Separated at birth?

[jick]

jick, before i destroy you, i want to say i really like your pro-pop threads. i agree with everything you say about u2's finest. well almost finest.

but for you to come here and compare bon jovi to u2, while citing INCORRECT "facts" makes you look even worse than simply saying you like them.

bon jovi sucks balls, and licks taint on occasion. u2 kisses in clean areas.

seriously i cannot understand how u2 fans like such SHITTY music like creed and bon jovi and what not.

You don't seem to be saying anything construction here eh?

Cheers,

J
The King Of POP

 

[jick]

THE VERDICT: U2 WINS BUT that doesn't mean Bon Jovi is a bad band. In fact they are a great band and they deserve more respect around here.

One more thing. If U2 were to put out a song similiar to It's My Life people here would be saying how much U2 rocks and how they are such a great rock band and that the Edge is such a great guitar player. I remember people saying how much New York rocked when ATYCLB was released. If Bon Jovi was to put out a song like Please or even Lemon people here would say it sounded like their same old 80's stuff. It's the 21st century and people still won't accept something because it's different--Sad

I totally agree with your verdict! U2 beats Bon Jovi! There are some songs of U2 that could have easily been a Bon Jovi song and vice versa, but these songs are just exceptions to the rule. In my post above, I did mention Dry County as one of them.

Cheers,

J
The King Of POP

 

[jick]

Technical ability doesn't mean much to me. The Ramones play 3 chords & still blow BJ out of the water. The Goal is Soul, and that is something Bon Jovi is serious lacking.

But this is just my opinion, nothing personal. Millions of people love BJ, and any music that makes you feel good is good music.

Oh, BJ would never be able to put out a song like Please or Lemon.

The Goal Is Soul! In the Keep The Faith album, Bon Jovi did have a song "A Little Bit Of Soul" where he said "all you need to getby is a little bit of soul." Maybe this is where Bono coined his "The Goal Is Soul" phrase?

While Bon Jovi may never write a song like Lemon, I don't think U2 have a song about working class America like Livin' On A Prayer. Once again, different strokes for different folks, but both bands manage to get there.

Cheers,

J
The King Of POP

 

[jick]

I've never heard Jon Bon Jovi sing in a falsetto. I've never even heard him sing in a different range. All I've ever noticed about his singing is that his voice has always sounded the same. He has that weird New Jersy sounding voice. I'll give him credit, his voice hasn't changed since I first heard him in 87, that could be taken as either good or bad.

Bon Jovi's voice has changed. His vocal range isn't what it used to be.

You know what? Non-U2 fans would always tell me "I can't believe that Bono's voice hasn't changed all these years." I would love to tell them that Bono's voice is much different now but I'd rather not.

The thing about Bono's voice is that NO ONE, and absolutely no one sounds like him. His voice is so distinctive. Dave Matthews and John Meyer are quite similar. Jon Bon Jovi has that sort of Bryan Adams tingle to his voice. Even Sting's wails are reminiscent of the lead singer of the Outfield. But Bono is so unique, just like Richard Butler of the Psychedelic Furs, that once you even hear the first word you know where it's from.

Cheers,

J
The King Of POP

 

[U2Kitten]

Bon Jovi is not a bad band. Besides U2 they are the only 80's band who can still fill an arena. It takes 3-4 other 80's bands to fill one small ampitheater or 2,500 seater, and Bon Jovi, like U2, can sustain a sold out tour of 20,000 seat arenas. Regardless of anyone's opinion of Bon Jovi's music, that is a fact. They have a large and faithful following and their fans feel very strongly about them.

Though Bon Jovi is not as good as U2, I don't have anything against them. They don't deserve to be called 'crap.' Jon Bon Jovi is very hot too I liked the story from Cleveland last year, when Bon Jovi's plane pulled up next to Elevation Air. Both bands were in town, U2 played, then went down to Lexington and played, then U2 went back to Cleveland, went to the Bon Jovi concert and partied all night long with Bon Jovi band members!

 

[doctorwho]

I have to defend Bon Jovi here. I am not a fanboy of any band. U2 is my favorite band but that dosen't mean I have to hate bands that take a different approach. I really like Bon Jovi. I really like Creed too but I'll save that for another post.

Jon Vs. Bono: Jon has a larger range than Bono. Bono can barely hit A's now (Colors that have never been seen). Jon can still easily hit B's. Now I know people are going to say that Bono's more about emotion than ability and that may be true but the fact is Jon can hit the notes. Jon also looks cooler. Bono is cool but Jon is cooler in an American way. He's from New Jersey. If you were in a fight who would you rather have at your back? Bono does however write better lyrics in my opinion. I say this one is a draw.

Just a few quick comments about the above...

I don't believe U2 fans hate other bands. In fact, most here praise aritsts like Radiohead (whom I dislike), R.E.M. (great stuff), RHCP (great stuff), etc. The difference though is that all of these artists have more universal approval - that is, both fans and critics adore them. They are all widely recognized for producing great material. Some of it might not appeal to all of us (like Radiohead to me), but even then, we can appreciate the artistry of the work.

In contrast, Bon Jovi has produced nothing but pop-rockish songs. Not that these are bad - it's just that they lack the depth and substance that the above artists have. There are plenty of times we all want to kick back and have fun with a more meaningless song like the type that Bon Jovi creates. But when we want serious music, most fans here - and I concur - do not think of Bon Jovi.

That said, as I wrote earlier, I give them credit for their endurance and their extended popularity. They have been able to achieve a status few bands have.

With regards to the singing styles of Jon Bon Jovi and Bono... Jon Bon Jovi screams and screeches his songs, with a hoarse, scratchy voice. Bono has a more operatic tenor full of emotion. When Bono resorts to a falsetto or fails to hit a note full on, everyone here - including yourself based on what you wrote above - is all over the guy. I constantly read threads about Bono's scratchy voice. Yet, Jon Bon Jovi has made this his style of singing. In other words, what we consider horrible singing from Bono is considered good singing by Jon! I think that alone is all there is to say on this topic! If Bono were to resort to scrachy hoarse singing, I bet he could hit those notes too - but clearly that's not his style or intent.

 

[pinkfloyd]

burn , baby , Burn !

By technical skills , Bonjovi maybe are better , but all other stuuf ... BonJovi is band made by producer who did all this hairy shit ( Motley Crue , Poison etc etc ) , this is a castrated and pop-bubbled form of Guns'N'Roses ( who were a real superb rock band 1987 -1992 , R.I.P. ) . one song which i like ( Always ) , that's all , all other stuff is boring , useless , ripoff etc etc . Bon Jovi don't have the feeling of the world ( like R.H.C.P or U2 even the fact that u2 didin't tour in europe , they're very big there ) too american , like Billy Joel or something , no good costumes or image ,

 

[Hawkmoon1021]

The Goal Is Soul! In the Keep The Faith album, Bon Jovi did have a song "A Little Bit Of Soul" where he said "all you need to getby is a little bit of soul." Maybe this is where Bono coined his "The Goal Is Soul" phrase?

While Bon Jovi may never write a song like Lemon, I don't think U2 have a song about working class America like Livin' On A Prayer. Once again, different strokes for different folks, but both bands manage to get there.

Cheers,

J
The King Of POP

That is the funniest thing I ever read.

 

[Johnny Swallow]

I think of this whole deal like the movie 'Twins'. They were seperated at birth, all that was good and pure went into U2, and all the useless crap that was left over went to Bon Jovi.

 

[jick]

Re: burn , baby , Burn !

one song which i like ( Always ) , that's all , all other stuff is boring , useless , ripoff etc etc . Bon Jovi don't have the feeling of the world ( like R.H.C.P or U2 even the fact that u2 didin't tour in europe , they're very big there ) too american , like Billy Joel or something , no good costumes or image ,

I like U2's "Always" more than Bon Jovi's "Always". It had great lines like "go find yourself in someone else" and "if you dream then dream out loud." Very upbeat song ...it just keeps growing on me. Meanwhile, Bon Jovi's "Always" is just another typical power-pop ballad ...not that it's bad, but U2's is better.

Cheers,

J
The King Of POP

 

[Screaming Flower]

more to the point, why would u want to compare them?

i just really hate when i attempt to type bon jovi it always comes out as bono jovi. yeah, that really bugs me.

maybe he wanted to give us a good laugh first thing in the morning (or before you go to bed or work or whatever if you're in kiwiland).

bono jovi would bother me too.

 

[JOFO]

bonjovi:

buttrockerbuttrockerbuttrockerbuttrockerbuttrockerbuttrockerbuttrockerbuttrockerbuttrockerbuttrockerbuttrockerbuttrockerbuttrocker

etc.

 

[EPandAmerica]

I think of this whole deal like the movie 'Twins'. They were seperated at birth, all that was good and pure went into U2, and all the useless crap that was left over went to Bon Jovi.

 

[Bono's shades]

Disliking someone's music is just a matter of taste or preference. There is no wrong or right.

But sales figures, concert attendance, and public appearances are tangible and real facts and this is what I base my post on.

One guy can say Bon Jovi's music sucks, another guy can say it rocks. One guy can say U2 make the same music every year, another guy can say the opposite. Yet there is no wrong or right since it is opinion.

Comparisons based on hard facts are tangible and measurable though and that ismy basis.

Cheers,

J
The King Of POP

Yes, it is true to some extent that opinions about the merits of a band (or a book, TV show, movie, etc.) are just that - opinions. But sometimes the gulf between one thing and another is so glaringly obvious that "opinions" become a lot less personal and subjective. For example, I think you would have to be tone-deaf to say that U2 has made the same record over and over again. Consider the difference between "Rattle and Hum" and "Pop" - they don't even sound like they are from the same band! And once again, I don't think how many records a band sells or how many stadiums they fill can be considered a "fact" proving how good said band is. All that "proves" is there are lots of people in the world who wouldn't know good music if it bit them in the ass.

 

[RavenStar]

You have to keep in mind that since we are U2 fans we know their music inside and out. Alot of us here arent BJ fans so dont really know there music that well. It's like this. Sometimes I find it difficult to tell..lets say..a Chinese person from a Korean person. This is mostly because I'm not familiar with the different looks of people in China or Korea. I have a Korean friend who can tell Chinese and Koreans apart instantly. The point I;m getting at is U2's music sounds different to us because we know it so well. While we (not everyone) may not know BJ's music that well so it all seems the same.

 

[HeartlandGirl]

I think of this whole deal like the movie 'Twins'. They were seperated at birth, all that was good and pure went into U2, and all the useless crap that was left over went to Bon Jovi.

This whole thread, especially the above comment, are making me

I have two comments.

1. I liked Bon Jovi when I was in the fourth grade. They were my favorite band. I guess to a fourth grader, using the word "whoa" as a major lyric in a song is not so offensive.

2. My mother-in-law, God bless her, is a big Bon Jovi fan. I think it is literally the only CD she owns (uh, the one with the AB rip-off cover with "It's My Life" on it). Any time my husband and I want to tease her, we start singing "It's My Life." Nothing mean, just all in good fun. She is the only person I know who currently listens to Bon Jovi.

So there are some observations for ya. Still at buttrocker!

 

[david]

Red Hot Chilli Peppers? I didn't even know they were around for 20 years already!

REM is already a dinosaur band, not played in mainstream anymore. But the Chilli Peppers still are, but I really never knew they were around for 20 years already.

Thanks for your insights. Bon Jovi does make relevant music too. You should keep an eye out for their new album Bounce, the initial reviews are all praises for it although I haven't heard any song from it yet.

Cheers,

J
The King Of POP

Flea and Anthony Keidis met in high school in 81 I think. Or even before, I'm not sure. They formed a band in 83 and played in clubs for a while. In 1984 they released their first album. So they're nearing the 20 year mark. Just a few more years I guess.

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

I like U2's "Always" more than Bon Jovi's "Always". It had great lines like "go find yourself in someone else" and "if you dream then dream out loud."

good god i hope you're joking. that first line is from "love comes tumbling," and the second line is from "acrobat."

 

[Whats The Story?]

"One-trick pony" and "inoffensive and shallow" - now that's another way of stating what I previously stated:

"Their approach to songwriting is different. Their approach to song structures is different. Yet they still manage to have the same result. Two separate roads diverge. Two unique bands who defy all the odds and conventional wisdom as to how long a rock band is supposed to stay relevant."


I wouldn't be surprised if non-U2 fans would label U2 as one-trick ponies and writing about nothing but political stuff. That's because they aren't familiar with the rich catalogue of U2's songs. Same thing for non Bon Jovi fans. I do remember posting in the past in another previous message board how Bon Jovi's song "Dry County" could have easily been something Bono would have written. Meanwhile, the soaring chorus of "Kite" could have easily have been something Bon Jovi sang. As I said, both bands have very very very different approaches, so it is highly improbable that a fan of one band would "get" what the other band is all about. But the end result based on sales figures and logevity and concert attendance is remarkably similar. There are more than two ways to skin a cat.

Cheers,

J
The King Of POP

Some points: Jick, why do you relate high sales figures to good quality music? Like has already been said, terrible boybands sell millions of records, yet their records have no artistic merit.

It is painfully obvious Bon Jovi cannot evolve their music in any way whatsoever. While its true that some non-U2 fans may say they are a one-trick pony also, a quick listen to a few songs from '90s U2 compared to '80s U2 will show how U2 changes their musical direction all the time. Bon Jovi sticks to the safe method of a boybandesque rocker (its my life, one wild night) and a cheesy power ballad to get them in the charts. They are just as pop as N'Sync with not amn ounce of artistic integrity or crediblity.

As for Bon Jovi looking cool!??

 

[Zoots]

please...

Being such a big fan of the innovative masterpiece that is 'Pop', how could you even compare these 2 bands. Seperated at birth??? Seems to me like you used such words only to antagonize other fans.

Okay, I dont dislike Bon Jovi. But U2 has the following assets that Bon Jovi doesnt.

- Songwriting that covers a wide range of subjects not only political and religious but also personal and relevant.
- The sheer unpredictable nature of U2, always keeping their fans excited about a forthcoming album.
- Less cheesy love songs. Leave that to the boy bands, Britney Spears and the like.
- Every U2 album stands alone, doesnt sound like anything from the past. This shows the quality and talent of a band.

Bon Jovi's got some good stuff too. I like their Keep The Faith album a lot. The thing is they're definately dated. Crush could well have been released in 1985. They're dated but U2 is anything but. That's why I prefer U2.

U2 has gotta be careful though. After all the media hype from ATYCLB, the huge elevation tours, the 'greatest band on earth' image, the increase in female fans ( ) etc., they could be heading towards getting compared with very mainstream bands like the Jovi.

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

unnamed_streets is spot on

 

[bullet the blue sky]

this thread is silly. please make it stop

 

[Zoots]

unnamed_streets is spot on

Thanks.

please make it stop

 

[jick]

You have to keep in mind that since we are U2 fans we know their music inside and out. Alot of us here arent BJ fans so dont really know there music that well. It's like this. Sometimes I find it difficult to tell..lets say..a Chinese person from a Korean person. This is mostly because I'm not familiar with the different looks of people in China or Korea. I have a Korean friend who can tell Chinese and Koreans apart instantly. The point I;m getting at is U2's music sounds different to us because we know it so well. While we (not everyone) may not know BJ's music that well so it all seems the same.

Very nice point here. You have to realize that non-U2 and non-Bon Jovi fans only hear their singles and not the whole album. So some would think U2 are one-tracked or Bon Jovi are one-tracked. I love your Chinese-Korean analogy. Your profile says you are from Canada, do you like Avril Lavigne?

Cheers,

J
The King Of POP

 

[jick]

This whole thread, especially the above comment, are making me

I have two comments.

1. I liked Bon Jovi when I was in the fourth grade. They were my favorite band. I guess to a fourth grader, using the word "whoa" as a major lyric in a song is not so offensive.

2. My mother-in-law, God bless her, is a big Bon Jovi fan. I think it is literally the only CD she owns (uh, the one with the AB rip-off cover with "It's My Life" on it). Any time my husband and I want to tease her, we start singing "It's My Life." Nothing mean, just all in good fun. She is the only person I know who currently listens to Bon Jovi.

So there are some observations for ya. Still at buttrocker!

That's really great to hear that your mom-in-law loves Bon Jovi. It just reinforces my point that Bon Jovi appeals to all sexes and ages, just like U2!

Cheers,

J
The King Of POP

 

[jick]

Flea and Anthony Keidis met in high school in 81 I think. Or even before, I'm not sure. They formed a band in 83 and played in clubs for a while. In 1984 they released their first album. So they're nearing the 20 year mark. Just a few more years I guess.

Thanks! I never knew this because I am not a Chilli Peppers fan. But now that you mention it, I have more respect for them and I guess they should be added to that elite list of bands that have defied the odds. While I admit my ignorance about the Chilli Peppers, some people here who are not familiar with Bon Jovi are quick to bash that band. Rather than bash Bon Jovi or the Chilli Peppers, it is better to admit ignorance and approach appreciation of other music with an open mind.

Cheers,

J
The King Of POP

 

[jick]

good god i hope you're joking. that first line is from "love comes tumbling," and the second line is from "acrobat."

No I am not joking. Check out the lyrics for U2's Always. You are in a U2 forum and you don't the lyrics to Always? Shame on you ...just kidding!

Love Comes Tumbling was "I am yourself in someone else, go find yourself in me."

"Dream out loud" was coined during the Lovetown Tour I think. So Bono does repeat his lines, but I just loved the way it worked in context along with the upbeat nature of Always ...U2's Always I mean, not Bon Jovi's which can't hold a candle to U2's IMHO.

Cheers,

J
The King Of POP

 

[jick]

Re: please...

Being such a big fan of the innovative masterpiece that is 'Pop', how could you even compare these 2 bands. Seperated at birth??? Seems to me like you used such words only to antagonize other fans.

Bon Jovi's got some good stuff too. I like their Keep The Faith album a lot. The thing is they're definately dated. Crush could well have been released in 1985. They're dated but U2 is anything but. That's why I prefer U2.

See? It is very natural for fans of POP, like me, to appreciate Bon Jovi's "Keep The Faith" album.

"Dry County" is a theme just like Wake Up Dead Man or If God Will Send His Angels.

"I'll Sleep When I'm Dead" deals with excess just like Playboy Mansion, and is also a party just like Discotheque.

"Keep The Faith" has a good message in it, the he still believes kinda like how POP seemed todiss God yet if you look inside Bono still kept his faith intact.

"If I Was Your Mother" is well ...Mofo!

"I Believe" and "A Little Bit Of Soul" mentions Bon Jovi's goal - which is soul "..what we need right now/ is a little sould" and "all you need to get by, is a little bit of soul". I wouldn't be surprised if Bono coined his "The Goal Is Soul" from Bon Jovi's Keep The Faith album.

Keep The Faith was released in 1993, POP was released in 1997. I guess Bon Jovi's "Keep The Faith" was their version of POP, and it came earlier than POP. Then again, it is U2's POP that is their version of Bon Jovi's Keep The Faith since it came later ..but POP is a much more musically and lyrically refined album but that's just my opinion.

Cheers,

J
The King Of POP

 

[jick]

Some points: Jick, why do you relate high sales figures to good quality music? Like has already been said, terrible boybands sell millions of records, yet their records have no artistic merit.

It is painfully obvious Bon Jovi cannot evolve their music in any way whatsoever. While its true that some non-U2 fans may say they are a one-trick pony also, a quick listen to a few songs from '90s U2 compared to '80s U2 will show how U2 changes their musical direction all the time. Bon Jovi sticks to the safe method of a boybandesque rocker (its my life, one wild night) and a cheesy power ballad to get them in the charts. They are just as pop as N'Sync with not amn ounce of artistic integrity or crediblity.

As for Bon Jovi looking cool!??

I have never related quality sales with good music. I just said sales are measurable, while music quality is a matter of preference. And sales may reflect longevity and relevance. And Bon Jovi's sales are similar to U2's ...but it's not that fact alone. It's the fact that 20 years into their careers, their most recent albums were still topsellers. This is where I draw their comparisons among other things.

As I said, for quality your mileage may vary. I personally prefer U2's songwriting style, but others may prefer Bon Jovi and I'm fine with that. As I always repeat, both bands get there, they just use different styles andI prefer U2's style.

Do you own all the Bon Jovi albums? I just think it would be unfair to think of Bon Jovi as one-trick ponies just based on the singles you hear on the radio. Some of U2's most diverse and brilliant songs were not released as singles, let alone played live --- So Cruel, Red Hill Mining Town, Acrobat, Grace, and Heartland come to mind. Bon Jovi may have many hidden gems not everyone has heard.

Cheers,

J
The King Of POP

 

[Whats The Story?]

I've heard many Bon Jovi tunes, enough to know what sort of "band" they are. Your reference to sales in relation to longevity and relevance: I believe that Bon Jovi tend to appeal to many lower common denominator types, hence their big sales. Their sales figures in no way reflect the quality of their music, in this case I don't think its a matter of opinionthat theu are a rubbish band, but a FACT. This is the band with the lyric: "french kiss the morning" amongst others, and who have drafted in pop songwriters to help them....worst band ever!