U2 shouldn't try to be the "world's biggest band" anymore...

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
What exactly do you mean by "Adult Contemporary" crowd? Just because U2 appeals to a lot of people in their 30s and 40s does not make them (or their fans) "Adult Contemporary". AC/DC, Guns'N'Roses, Metallica, Zeppelin , The Clash, and other ear-splitting groups are "old" bands...does that now make them Adult Contemporary along with the likes of Michael Bolton, Celine Dion and Mariah Carey? Get real. I don't ever recall oir expect to hear "Back In Black", "Master of Puppets", or "Weclome to the Jungle" in an elevator or in my local supermarket.

Using the word U2 with "Adult Contemporary" is blasphemy.


Zoocoustic said:
Why do I say this?

Three reasons.

First, it's their age. They are mid-40's, and I feel past the point of attracting the majority of the high-school crowd, or a lot of new, young fans. At this point, they more often than not come off as desperate old men trying to fit in. Vertigo reached that young group - I'll give them that - but after that, it's all been basically the Adult Contemporary crowd.

Second, they've already proven it several times before. They were the world's biggest band from the mid-80's through 1993, and then from 2000-2002. You could even argue the Pop and HTDAAB eras as well. They've shown they can come back from being out of the spotlight. They have a massive following. Even those who hate them can't get away from them when they are releasing an album or touring.

Third and finally, walking away from this obsession to be the "world's biggest band" gives U2 a real chance to do something creative and daring again - like they did all the way up until the year 2000. I believe after hearing songs like Mercy and Fast Cars, that U2 still has that creative spark in them, but that they are too afraid it might not result in a worldwide #1 album. They need to get over this phobia and tap into that place that gave us such daring, fresh, creative songs as The Fly, HMTMKMKM, Lemon, Please, etc.

That's my two cents...thoughts?
 
ZoocousticThird and finally, walking away from this obsession to be the "world's biggest band" gives U2 a real chance to do something creative and daring again - like they did all the way up until the year 2000. I believe after hearing songs like Mercy and Fast Cars, that U2 still has that creative spark in them, but that they are too afraid it might not result in a worldwide #1 album. They need to get over this phobia and tap into that place that gave us such daring, fresh, creative songs as The Fly, HMTMKMKM, Lemon, Please, etc.
yep ,sounds good, i second this. U2 please bring on again more creativity & more experiments and don't look at the charts too much...
***** quantity doesn't always mean quality
 
Re: Re: U2 shouldn't try to be the "world's biggest band" anymore...

LeafsNation said:
What exactly do you mean by "Adult Contemporary" crowd? Just because U2 appeals to a lot of people in their 30s and 40s does not make them (or their fans) "Adult Contemporary". AC/DC, Guns'N'Roses, Metallica, Zeppelin , The Clash, and other ear-splitting groups are "old" bands...does that now make them Adult Contemporary along with the likes of Michael Bolton, Celine Dion and Mariah Carey? Get real. I don't ever recall oir expect to hear "Back In Black", "Master of Puppets", or "Weclome to the Jungle" in an elevator or in my local supermarket.

Using the word U2 with "Adult Contemporary" is blasphemy.



"Adult Contemporary" is not the correct word, but "Adult Top 40" would be. That is one of the billboard charts and it was the only place "Sometimes..." did well. Actually, it also did well on Triple A radio (Adult Album Alternative or some other combination of those three words- can't remember) but billboard does not chart that.

However, some other charts besides billboard refer to Adult Top 40 as "Hot Adult Contemporary". ATYCLB was huge hit because of Adult Top 40 (Hot Adult Contemporary) more than anything else, so Zoocoustic was pretty close to correct.
 
Does the biggest band in the world try to be the biggest band in the world, or are they just it anyway?
 
u2 were the biggest band in the world !! 1987 to 1995 !!

are they the biggest band in the world right now, im afraid not and the music speaks for it(s) self!!
 
shaun vox said:
u2 were the biggest band in the world !! 1987 to 1995 !!

are they the biggest band in the world right now, im afraid not and the music speaks for it(s) self!!


Who is bigger than U2 right now then?;)
 
I think they should totally reinvent themselves like they did before. Then they would be the world's biggest band without trying...that is, if it doesn't flop.
 
Okay you allare saying u2 are sellouts no longer the best, trying to be the biggest. IMO opinion U2 went way to far with Pop, they were no longer U2, if you went back to 1980, gave U2 a copy of Discotheque and a copy of Vertigo, then showed them what the world will be like in 1997 and 2005. And then asked them what sounded more like selling out, I would bet money they would choose Discotheque. If U2 were really selling otu and trying to be the bigest, they would be rapping or would make a album full of really badly written songs with shit melody, because thats what people want. What was more popular when it came out

Vertigo(U2) or Ghetto Gospel(2.Pac with Elton John)?

The answer is Ghetto Gospel, Elton John is suddenly cool.
When Vertigo happened what were U2, according to 75% of people i know. Gayass, talentless losers, who only make music so they can be alone in the studio to suck each others dicks.

And in todays world if you make a song that someone who generally doesn't like your tye of music is selling out.
If someone likes rap, U2 sold out.
And if U2 try to be cool, and make album, with a techno-dance single leading it, and it bombs, then they have suddenly made there best album.
Okay I agree that Pop is underrated by critics, it has some brillant songs, but it was a bad step come on when i first heard Discotheque, Do you feel loved, Mofo, and If God Will Send His Angels, the first words out of my mouth where This is not U2, this is a fucking nightmare. I had most of U2's albums at this time, still lacked Zooropa and Passengers, but enjoyed the songs from Zooropa I heard live on a old audio tape. Knew U2's styles and this shocked, this was too different. To me Pop is still there worst outing, it was months before I could even except Half the sounds and being U2 and enjoy, still don't enjoy some.
Overall I'm glad U2 decided to move to ATYCLB, people may say it was U2 selling out, to me it is U2's No matter how bad life is, you gotta continue on, and to me it was also U2 saying
No matter how much Pop was a failure, we will continue making music we want to. People who call the brillance of Beautiful Day, Walk on, Kite and In My Opinion Elevation, Stuck In a Moment and Peace On Earth, selling out amaze me, to me these ae u2 at there best, I have so much more to say but I have a baskletball game in 7 minutes, so gotta run, well thats my 2 cents.
 
Irishteen said:
Okay you allare saying u2 are sellouts no longer the best, trying to be the biggest.

I am NOT saying they are selling out, just that they lost their drive to experiment. That experimentation that always made me fascinated with where they would go next. There is no more shock of the new.

Some people do not want the shock of the new. They want U2 to be U2. Which is fine, I love the way U2 sounds. I just personally like the shock.
 
wow i never for one minute expected this thread to go like this.... so many people think that just because THEY dont like the new album that U2 should change just for THEM, well am sorry guys but i actually like this phase of U2, if you dont then i apologise, but people do, and for you to make comments like "U2 should do this etc" is just plain wrong, they should do what THEY want to do, i really dont think they care if you dont like it, because its pretty obvious that so many others do
 
U2 should do what U2 wants. And if you don't like it, that's your problem.
 
rjhbonovox said:
Yep biggest and best are not one and the same. Its time U2 got there heads outta their arses and started making music for more intelligent music fans and not for the fuc#ing pop kids that they were so desperate to drop in the 90's! Bono said it "we might lose the pop kids, but we don't need them" back in 1992, now it seems the opposite applies to everything U2 do!:wink:


All of this would hold true if ATYCLB and HTDAAB were absolute crap albums that everyone here hated. But even you know this isn't true. Yes, we all know how much you hate them, but I love them. In fact, I adore them FAR more than "Pop" and "Zooropa".

Also, I find it hard to accept that when Bono says things these days, we read between the lines, realizing that Bono is often full of it (and has a wicked sense of humor). But when he said "we don't care if we lose the teeny boppers" back in '92, we take it as sacrosanct. I, for one, do not believe the U2 of '91/'92 tried to lose their teeny-bopper fans at all. In fact, one might argue that with catchy songs like "Mysterious Ways" and "One", they tried harder to keep those fans.

I will agree with the "essence" of your post in that even I feel it's time for U2 to experiment more. U2 have it on HTDAAB, which is a good thing. Now that U2 have explored their own sound on two albums, it's time to get into that experimental mode again. No need to prove anything to anyone - they've done it. And even if the next album only sells as well as "Pop" (and how many artists out there would love an album that sells 1.5M in the U.S. and 7M worldwide?!?!), they will still draw in the crowds in any tour. As such, it's time to take some risks again and not worry about this "biggest band" nonsense.
 
I totally agree with the first post.

By trying to be "the biggest band," it's harder for U2 to experiment. I love the recent albums, but I wish Bono would be a bit more daring--lately he's been pretty boring and preachy, and I miss the artsy, Euro-style, avante-garde double-entendres of the Zoo TV and Zooropa era.

They need to go off to a strange exotic city (don't record in Dublin AGAIN!) and dream up some wild new sounds for the next album. Who cares what it sells?
 
shaun vox said:
u2 were the biggest band in the world !! 1987 to 1995 !!

are they the biggest band in the world right now, im afraid not and the music speaks for it(s) self!!

Much like your friend, rjhbonovox, we all know how much you hate the last two albums.

However, your personal opinion aside, U2 easily have a claim on the "biggest band" title. Their last two albums sold 20-21M copies worldwide, with over 7M just in the U.S. They've won a whopping 10 Grammy awards from those albums. HTDAAB produced two #1 songs in the U.K., the first time U2 has ever done that in their careers. Every show on the last two tours has sold out. Unlike some artists, U2 has worldwide appeal, even selling well in Japan! It's this universal appeal that, IMO, makes U2 the biggest band in the world at present.

Furthermore, I fully feel that the music on the last two albums is outstanding. Classics such as "Walk On", "Kite", "Vertigo", "Love & Peace", and "Beautiful Day" rank up there with the best U2 has to offer from either the 80's or 90's. U2 obtained the biggest band title in the 80's. They still own it, IMO.
 
The people that dont think U2 is the best band in the world will probably never be converted into thinking they are. I dont understand what is so "uncreative" about the last 2 albums myself but I threw my hands up in the air thinking about that a long time ago. Maybe U2 should record a disco record at studio 54 and then people here might think that is "creative" but probably not.
 
doctorwho said:


Much like your friend, rjhbonovox, we all know how much you hate the last two albums.

However, your personal opinion aside, U2 easily have a claim on the "biggest band" title. Their last two albums sold 20-21M copies worldwide, with over 7M just in the U.S. They've won a whopping 10 Grammy awards from those albums. HTDAAB produced two #1 songs in the U.K., the first time U2 has ever done that in their careers. Every show on the last two tours has sold out. Unlike some artists, U2 has worldwide appeal, even selling well in Japan! It's this universal appeal that, IMO, makes U2 the biggest band in the world at present.

Furthermore, I fully feel that the music on the last two albums is outstanding. Classics such as "Walk On", "Kite", "Vertigo", "Love & Peace", and "Beautiful Day" rank up there with the best U2 has to offer from either the 80's or 90's. U2 obtained the biggest band title in the 80's. They still own it, IMO.

:yes: you could make an arguement that U2 isn't the biggest band in America, but I think overall they are indeed the biggest band in the world. It's the universal appeal, you're right.

Of course, there's a difference between "biggest" and "best." Personally I think U2 is still the best band in the world, but that's where the disagreement starts here, it seems.
 
Yahweh said:
The people that dont think U2 is the best band in the world will probably never be converted into thinking they are. I dont understand what is so "uncreative" about the last 2 albums myself but I threw my hands up in the air thinking about that a long time ago. Maybe U2 should record a disco record at studio 54 and then people here might think that is "creative" but probably not.
if they did go and make a new sound again, the same people that want them to make the new sound will be saying "i dont like the new sound" you just know it would happen, they would be called weak, and putting no effort in etc
 
This whole best vs. biggest band thing...Bono said that his reason for saying that was, a. yes, to motivate the band, but also b. to challenge other bands to prove them wrong, step up and compete against them, or with them against bubblegum pop music.

I think his biggest motivation for saying that, was just that, to get "rock" music back instead of the teeny bopper stuff that was popular in the late 90's.

Anyone remember when Backstreet Boys, Nsync, Britney Spears were all the rage, rap/rock like Limp Bizkit?

2005, way more rock music that's popular than in 2000.

Not that most people really pay attention to MTV, or the awards show, but Green Day and Coldplay are up for video of the year, against, Snoop Dog, Kanye West, and Gwen Stefani.

U2 are up for 5 as well, for group video, who Green Day, the Killers, and Coldplay are in, along with Destiny's Child and Black Eyed Peas.

Weezer are nominated.

Definitely more of a "rock" presence than 5 years ago.
 
Zoocoustic said:
Why do I say this?

Three reasons.

First, it's their age. They are mid-40's, and I feel past the point of attracting the majority of the high-school crowd, or a lot of new, young fans. At this point, they more often than not come off as desperate old men trying to fit in. Vertigo reached that young group - I'll give them that - but after that, it's all been basically the Adult Contemporary crowd.

Second, they've already proven it several times before. They were the world's biggest band from the mid-80's through 1993, and then from 2000-2002. You could even argue the Pop and HTDAAB eras as well. They've shown they can come back from being out of the spotlight. They have a massive following. Even those who hate them can't get away from them when they are releasing an album or touring.

Third and finally, walking away from this obsession to be the "world's biggest band" gives U2 a real chance to do something creative and daring again - like they did all the way up until the year 2000. I believe after hearing songs like Mercy and Fast Cars, that U2 still has that creative spark in them, but that they are too afraid it might not result in a worldwide #1 album. They need to get over this phobia and tap into that place that gave us such daring, fresh, creative songs as The Fly, HMTMKMKM, Lemon, Please, etc.

That's my two cents...thoughts?

I agree but what's interesting is maybe U2 wanted to grab the publics attention again by putting out a couple great albums that they knew would appeal to the general public and then go off and expeiriment with a new sound. This gives them an advantage. Now that they have the world wide attention of music fans by realseing two "classic" sounding u2 albums, more people will be tempted to buy the 3rd one which will deviate from the norm introducing people to yet again a "new" U2 with the ability to adapt, change and lead music into a new direction. Maybe this whole ATYCLB/HTDAAB thing is a way for the band to regroup and give fans somthing familiar and comfortable before asking them to join them on a new adventure. Two steps forward one step back kinda thing. then agai that's all pretty calculateing and I don't think U2 actually works that way. LOL! I think they just do what the feel and what they want to do at a certain given time. It's hard to be somthing you aren't. U2 is the biggest band in the world. Greenday is a fleeting thing right now, Oasis was huge, Eminem was big, Coldplay ummmm not even close. U2 are always big always will be big and there's not much even they can do about it I'm affraid.
 
Last edited:
Thinking again and again as long as there are 6 billion people (or around) living on earth in healthy mental condition, there could never be a Best Band in the World.
 
Back
Top Bottom