socceroo
The Fly
I think Greenday could be supergroup. Chilli Peppers may well be too. Placebo could even be - but their next album needs to be a bit different. All their themes are a bit the same - but they are great live.
U2, Last of the supergroups?
- Thread starter gman
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
prideofzootv
War Child
supergroups i know of so far are:-
1-Queen
2-U2
3-Led Zep
4-Bruce Springsteen
5-Rolling Stones
6-The Who
7-Pink Floyd
thats all i know of thats been listed, there is probably loads more but thats all i know of
1-Queen
2-U2
3-Led Zep
4-Bruce Springsteen
5-Rolling Stones
6-The Who
7-Pink Floyd
thats all i know of thats been listed, there is probably loads more but thats all i know of
Aardvark747
Blue Crack Addict
prideofzootv said:
Beatles?
annabelle
New Yorker
Ifeelnumb84 said:
Muse is the only band around at the moment with a hope of claiming the title of a supergroup in the future - that is if they wanted to do such a thing So glad that U2 are coming in November finally!! - but also hoping that Muse come down under soon...
Last edited:
prideofzootv
War Child
yeh forgot bout Beatles (how the hell did i forget bout them?!
angelordevil
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
LemonMacPhisto said:
*prays Coldplay doesn't go through a white robe/disco phase* 
The 'supergroup' thing always makes me nervous. On one level, a group reaching that status obviously has a universal appeal that suggests greatness. However, I think that tag can also box them into a place of expectations. I guess I'm speaking specifically of U2, and the last two albums...I'd love for them to risk a drop in popularity to put out another Zooropa-infused creation of goodness.
gr@cie said:
They're technically brilliant, from what I've heard so far...I still haven't reached that 'Aha!' moment with Muse, however, where I think of them as a band with the kind of heart and scope that makes me listen forever.
Last edited:
annie_vox
Refugee
I would like Muse to be the next supergroup... All love Absolution. I think it's close to the perfect album. Black Holes and Revelations is very good too, has very good songs, but in my opinion it can't be compared to Absolution as an album...
Sorchia
The Fly
Yay, Verve Fans! I knew I liked you people =)
As for Green Day, yeah they could do it, and I for one would be pleased to see it happen for them. They were, hands down, the best rock concert I have seen. And before I get blown to smithereens for saying that on a U2 forum, allow me to explain that U2 was not in the running because for me, they are not a concert. To me they are more like a religious experience, in that I feel closer to god at their concerts than I ever have in any church.
side note...speaking of smithereens...I dig them to!
As for Green Day, yeah they could do it, and I for one would be pleased to see it happen for them. They were, hands down, the best rock concert I have seen. And before I get blown to smithereens for saying that on a U2 forum, allow me to explain that U2 was not in the running because for me, they are not a concert. To me they are more like a religious experience, in that I feel closer to god at their concerts than I ever have in any church.
side note...speaking of smithereens...I dig them to!
U2Man
ONE love, blood, life
Although I like Muse and Absolution in particular, there is simply something about the lead singer's voice and way of singing that is simply too boring and monotonous to make them a long-lasting super group, I think.
xaviMF22
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
U2Man said:
*thomyorke*
U2Man
ONE love, blood, life
Yes, he does sound a little like Thom, when Thom is using one of his voices. But while Thom has a falsetto-like one and the one he uses during A Wolf At The Door, too, the guy in Muse has, from what I've heard, only one.
Bono's shades
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
I love Muse, but I don't see them as a supergroup. I live in a small town in the Midwest, and most people here probably have absolutely no idea who they are. To me you can't be a supergroup unless people in my little hick town at least know who you are.
Supergroups: U2, Pink Floyd, Rolling Stones, Aerosmith, The Who, Nirvana (while they lasted) Pearl Jam (until they decided they didn't want it).
Might be supergroups: Red Hot Chili Peppers, Green Day.
Supergroups: U2, Pink Floyd, Rolling Stones, Aerosmith, The Who, Nirvana (while they lasted) Pearl Jam (until they decided they didn't want it).
Might be supergroups: Red Hot Chili Peppers, Green Day.
The top 5 biggest bands in the world today are U2, Green Day, Coldplay, Red Hot Chilli Peppers, and the Rolling Stones.
U2: They have had the strongest combination of album sales and concert drawing strength of any artist or band since 1987. They have been the #2 concert drawing artist since 1987 behind the Stones and may actually be #1 now in that field with the Vertigo Tour. Massive Stadium tours, Vertigo Tour projected to GROSS $400 million dollars, and 10 million in sales of the latest album puts them way ahead of the band in 2nd place.
Green Day: The band are #2 in the world but their light years away from catching U2 since their current concert drawing strength is a tiny fraction of what U2's is. They have sold slightly more of their latest album, but not nearly enough to make up the huge difference in concert drawing strength they have with U2.
Coldplay: This band is on a slow steady rise, but their latest album and tour did not reach the sales levels many had expected. Still, their concert drawing strength is growing and only slightly behind that of Green Day's. Album sales were a little lower this time, but still in striking distance of Green Day's.
Red Hot Chilli Peppers: Their incredibly hot in certain parts of the world, but overall, their album sales are hit and miss, and US concert drawing power does not match that of Green Day and Coldplay. They just released a new album, but its hard to say if it will sell much better than the last one which did about 6 million worldwide.
The Rolling Stones: #1 concert drawing artist in the world from 1975 until 2005. They might be #2 now behind U2. They can only top U2 now in 2 maybe 3 countries around the world in concert drawing strength, Japan, Germany, and maybe and far from certain, the United States. The Stones album sales are comparitively weak. The latest album shipped nearly 3 million copies, but may have sold as little as 1.5 to 2 million copies. Still, even with album sales that low, concert drawing strength on their level always puts them in at least the top 10 or top 5 in the world.
In terms of being a supergroup, the Stones and U2 have done it, while Green Day, Chilli's and Coldplay still have miles to go before they achieve that level. I think the Peppers have peaked in their climb in this area. Coldplay and Green Day still have a shot, although they will have to get there within the next two to three albums after which their chances will probably start to diminish.
Radiohead despite their critical acclaim have never been a contender in this catagory. Barely going platinum or gold, and only periodically filling Arena's does not qualify one as a contender for being one of the big bands. Without getting into arguements about what is commercial and what isn't, this is just what the raw numbers show.
Pearl Jam essentially were a supergroup in North America in the early 1990s. But they never took off overseas the way they did in the United States. The band sold about 80% of their albums in North America in the early 90s. The bands popularity and image of being a peoples band and against the industry was actually one of their best selling points and not doing video's actually helped the band more than hurt it back in the early 90s. Things suddenly cooled down for their 4th album No Code, which sold significatly less than the previous three albums, and Pearl Jam's popularity has roughly remained where it was since the Fall of 1996. I don't see a second rise for Pearl Jam. The current album has sold about 1.2 million copies worldwide without about 50% of that in the USA. Album has dropped off of most charts worldwide and is only selling about 9,000 copies a week now in the USA. Pearl Jam indeed had potential to be a big band worldwide back in the early 90s with their massive popularity in North America. But they never developed a huge following outside North America, and their strong popularity in the USA only lasted about 4 years.
Its getting more difficult as each year passes for a new artist to do what U2, the Stones, Pink Floyd or any other super group achieved or continues to do. The 1990s did not actually produce any global artist with strong concert drawing strength and album selling strength that was lasting and on the level of a supergroup. This decade has yet to do it either.
File sharing and other ways of obtaining music for free is cutting heavily into music sales. The #100 album in the United States used to always sell about 15,000 copies, it now only sells 9,000 copies. People under the age of 18 are more interested in individual songs than albums. I-pods are used to make their own collections as opposed to listening to one arist album from beginning to end. Their obtaining the music for free or getting it at I-tunes which allows you to purchase individual songs rather than the whole album. All of this has resulted in decreasing album sales and decreasing devotion to any invididual artist or group. Concert attendance on average is also down. U2 and the Stones continue to survive in this environment because of the fan bases they built a decade or decades ago that continue to follow them. The trends in business, abilty to obtain free music, less devotion to any one artist, are all working against the chances of their being another super group or big band on the level of U2. Some wonder if record stores will even exist in 10 or 20 years. Will artist still come out with albums? Instead of an album every two or three years, the game might be a new song every two or three months. Its hard to say what will happen, but despite this, Green Day and Coldplay still have a shot although they really have a long way to go.
U2: They have had the strongest combination of album sales and concert drawing strength of any artist or band since 1987. They have been the #2 concert drawing artist since 1987 behind the Stones and may actually be #1 now in that field with the Vertigo Tour. Massive Stadium tours, Vertigo Tour projected to GROSS $400 million dollars, and 10 million in sales of the latest album puts them way ahead of the band in 2nd place.
Green Day: The band are #2 in the world but their light years away from catching U2 since their current concert drawing strength is a tiny fraction of what U2's is. They have sold slightly more of their latest album, but not nearly enough to make up the huge difference in concert drawing strength they have with U2.
Coldplay: This band is on a slow steady rise, but their latest album and tour did not reach the sales levels many had expected. Still, their concert drawing strength is growing and only slightly behind that of Green Day's. Album sales were a little lower this time, but still in striking distance of Green Day's.
Red Hot Chilli Peppers: Their incredibly hot in certain parts of the world, but overall, their album sales are hit and miss, and US concert drawing power does not match that of Green Day and Coldplay. They just released a new album, but its hard to say if it will sell much better than the last one which did about 6 million worldwide.
The Rolling Stones: #1 concert drawing artist in the world from 1975 until 2005. They might be #2 now behind U2. They can only top U2 now in 2 maybe 3 countries around the world in concert drawing strength, Japan, Germany, and maybe and far from certain, the United States. The Stones album sales are comparitively weak. The latest album shipped nearly 3 million copies, but may have sold as little as 1.5 to 2 million copies. Still, even with album sales that low, concert drawing strength on their level always puts them in at least the top 10 or top 5 in the world.
In terms of being a supergroup, the Stones and U2 have done it, while Green Day, Chilli's and Coldplay still have miles to go before they achieve that level. I think the Peppers have peaked in their climb in this area. Coldplay and Green Day still have a shot, although they will have to get there within the next two to three albums after which their chances will probably start to diminish.
Radiohead despite their critical acclaim have never been a contender in this catagory. Barely going platinum or gold, and only periodically filling Arena's does not qualify one as a contender for being one of the big bands. Without getting into arguements about what is commercial and what isn't, this is just what the raw numbers show.
Pearl Jam essentially were a supergroup in North America in the early 1990s. But they never took off overseas the way they did in the United States. The band sold about 80% of their albums in North America in the early 90s. The bands popularity and image of being a peoples band and against the industry was actually one of their best selling points and not doing video's actually helped the band more than hurt it back in the early 90s. Things suddenly cooled down for their 4th album No Code, which sold significatly less than the previous three albums, and Pearl Jam's popularity has roughly remained where it was since the Fall of 1996. I don't see a second rise for Pearl Jam. The current album has sold about 1.2 million copies worldwide without about 50% of that in the USA. Album has dropped off of most charts worldwide and is only selling about 9,000 copies a week now in the USA. Pearl Jam indeed had potential to be a big band worldwide back in the early 90s with their massive popularity in North America. But they never developed a huge following outside North America, and their strong popularity in the USA only lasted about 4 years.
Its getting more difficult as each year passes for a new artist to do what U2, the Stones, Pink Floyd or any other super group achieved or continues to do. The 1990s did not actually produce any global artist with strong concert drawing strength and album selling strength that was lasting and on the level of a supergroup. This decade has yet to do it either.
File sharing and other ways of obtaining music for free is cutting heavily into music sales. The #100 album in the United States used to always sell about 15,000 copies, it now only sells 9,000 copies. People under the age of 18 are more interested in individual songs than albums. I-pods are used to make their own collections as opposed to listening to one arist album from beginning to end. Their obtaining the music for free or getting it at I-tunes which allows you to purchase individual songs rather than the whole album. All of this has resulted in decreasing album sales and decreasing devotion to any invididual artist or group. Concert attendance on average is also down. U2 and the Stones continue to survive in this environment because of the fan bases they built a decade or decades ago that continue to follow them. The trends in business, abilty to obtain free music, less devotion to any one artist, are all working against the chances of their being another super group or big band on the level of U2. Some wonder if record stores will even exist in 10 or 20 years. Will artist still come out with albums? Instead of an album every two or three years, the game might be a new song every two or three months. Its hard to say what will happen, but despite this, Green Day and Coldplay still have a shot although they really have a long way to go.
Screwtape2
Blue Crack Addict
But logically doesn't a supergroup have to be the biggest band in the world at some point?
If this logic has merit:
A. The list of supergroups would really be short.
B. The band would have to have worldwide acclaim.
C. The band would have some influence on the music scene.
I'm not sure some of the groups listed are really supergroups. I think it would be hard for the possible canidates to fit B and C.
I think some kind of criteria for a supergroup should be formed, in an orderly manner. If you think my logic sucks please present some new ideas in thier place; I would really like to know how others define supergroup.
If this logic has merit:
A. The list of supergroups would really be short.
B. The band would have to have worldwide acclaim.
C. The band would have some influence on the music scene.
I'm not sure some of the groups listed are really supergroups. I think it would be hard for the possible canidates to fit B and C.
I think some kind of criteria for a supergroup should be formed, in an orderly manner. If you think my logic sucks please present some new ideas in thier place; I would really like to know how others define supergroup.
MacPhistoPT
Rock n' Roll Doggie
green day or muse have the chance I guess. I agree about the Chilis, they won't get any bigger than this.
pearl jam... well, definitely they could have been. but they decided not to... and that was the best choice since if they had gone through the other path we wouldn't have masterpieces like No Code, Yield and Binaural
edit: another band that had all the chances a few years ago was Guns N' Roses. but we all know what happened...
pearl jam... well, definitely they could have been. but they decided not to... and that was the best choice since if they had gone through the other path we wouldn't have masterpieces like No Code, Yield and Binaural
edit: another band that had all the chances a few years ago was Guns N' Roses. but we all know what happened...
Last edited:
Lemonfix
Refugee
The way the music world has shifted in the last few years makes me think that there won't be another supergroup--there are so many musical choices today and such expansive technology that I doubt there will be one band to rule them all, and I don't necessarily think that's a bad thing.
As for Muse, didn't their album debut at number 3 in the US or something? That's a good sign.
(I always thought the term Supergroup refered to a group made up of members from different famous bands, like ELO or the group on VH1 or some other brilliant sideproject )
As for Muse, didn't their album debut at number 3 in the US or something? That's a good sign.
(I always thought the term Supergroup refered to a group made up of members from different famous bands, like ELO or the group on VH1 or some other brilliant sideproject
)namkcuR
ONE love, blood, life
I can't believe no one has mentioned Metallica in a thread about supergroups. Even though they're not even close to what they used to be, they were a supergroup from 1984-1992. And they sure as hell looked like a supergroup during that S&M concert they did in 1998.
As for future Supergroups...Radiohead is good enough, without question, but they've opted not to go that route.
Coldplay isn't ambitious enough.
As for future Supergroups...Radiohead is good enough, without question, but they've opted not to go that route.
Coldplay isn't ambitious enough.
shaun vox
New Yorker
AEROSMITH, BON JOVI, Iron Maiden, Def Leppard, GNR and more are going strong and on tour!!
i just saw cinderella, slaughter and Poison last month!!talk about rocknroll!!
alot of the classic rock and 80s bands are coming back, they are on tour some making new music its fucking great!!
MUSE your kidding me right EMO EMO lol
i just saw cinderella, slaughter and Poison last month!!talk about rocknroll!!
alot of the classic rock and 80s bands are coming back, they are on tour some making new music its fucking great!!
MUSE your kidding me right EMO EMO lol
Screwtape2 said:
I think your on the right track with that formula. Often supergroup refers to simply how successful a band has been in the business in terms of album sales and concert drawing power. But critical acclaim, influence, awards etc. can also be a factor depending on what your trying to gauge and how you define the word supergroup.
namkcuR said:
In the summer of 1991 prior to the release of the Black Album, Metallica had only sold about 6 million albums worldwide. Many people forget or don't even know that the first 10 years of Metallica's career, they were essentially and underground band. The vast majority of people had never even heard of Metallica until their first video for "One" debuted on MTV in early 1989. Nearly all of Metallica's album sales and mass popularity has come since August of 1991.
But their popularity in terms of album sales peaked with the Black album and their concert drawing strength peaked with the Load/Re-Load albums. At their best, they were essentially a strong Arena act that could play stadiums if you loaded up the bill with strong opening bands like Korn, Kid Rock, Limp Bizkit, Linkin Park etc. Alone, in most markets, they would only be able to sellout arena shows at moderate prices.
The last album and tour did not do well at all by their previous standards. Most of the Arena shows did not sellout in North America, and the album peaked at 1.7 million in sales in North America, and nearly 4 million worldwide.
Despite this, they are still a very popular band, but their peak was in the early to mid 1990s and while they were one of the biggest bands in the world at that time, they were still a good distance away from being the biggest band in the world.
shaun vox said:
Hair metal is definitely good business in middle America, but this is a thread about GLOBAL supergroups and GNR and Bon Jovi are the only groups in the above list that you could argue may have had that title at one time. The other groups while big at one time were not nearly big enough for that title and had to much of their popularity concentrated in one market, North America.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
namkcuR said:
Whereas they do have a huge following, they really don't have global appeal. What I mean is that if you don't like hard rock you won't like Metallica, and most "casual fans" won't know anything prior to the black album.
Plus there's the fact that the last album just flat out sucked, I mean we can debate if U2's last two albums were any good or not, but their last album isn't even debatable.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
shaun vox said:
Did you pay for this show?
namkcuR
ONE love, blood, life
BonoVoxSupastar said:
Whereas they do have a huge following, they really don't have global appeal. What I mean is that if you don't like hard rock you won't like Metallica, and most "casual fans" won't know anything prior to the black album.
Plus there's the fact that the last album just flat out sucked, I mean we can debate if U2's last two albums were any good or not, but their last album isn't even debatable.
Yeah.
They had a song called 'Some Kind Of Monster'.
It sucked. But what a waste of such an awesome title. A title like that has so much potential.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
namkcuR said:
Did you ever see the documentary? I think by the same name...anyways, I never saw the full thing but the cut version they showed on VH1 was pretty interesting. Especially the part with Dave Mustaine.
namkcuR
ONE love, blood, life
BonoVoxSupastar said:
I saw it.
What I saw was a band that had little focus. A band that didn't know what to focus ON anymore.
All of their music back in the day was always fueled by one emotion: Anger. But now...they all grew up. They've dealt with alcoholism and drug addiction and death and now they're all clean. They have wives and kids now. It's like...they're just not that angry anymore, but they don't know how to make music fueled by any other emotion. Listening to St. Anger, and watching the band making the record in this documentary, it sounds like a band trying to fake anger. And faked anger just comes across as stale, hollow, and disingenuous.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
^ I completely agree. I think they're afraid of writing about anything else because they'll lose part of their fanbase. I guess that's a problem with being so one deminsional.
Screwtape2
Blue Crack Addict
BonoVoxSupastar said:
Sadly you could say the same about Coldplay. They aren't able to shake things up because I think they know that if they ever stop writing ballads and love songs they would lose thier fanbase.
Metallica is with Pearl Jam as a band that might have made the jump to supergroup.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Screwtape2 said:
Here we don't agree, PJ could have been the next U2 but made a conscious effort not to, Metallica just never had it in them. They're a supergroup amongst that style of music, but that's it.
Similar threads
