U2 - still relevant

[STING2]

Kieran McConville,

So I take it you think Radiohead is a band that is "plugged in" unlike U2?

 

[Bad Ronnie]

I prefer the Hermanns Hermits personally. They always had that skivvie thing goin' on.

 

[Kieran McConville]

Sting Two: Well I like Radiohead, yes. Well spotted. Is that a problem? It's not like I beat anybody over the head with that fact during my nauseatingly long rambles.

 

[diamond]

I will try my best to keep a certain band name out of this !

What do you think?
are they still influencial? still relevant?

stupid questions.
and youre 20 years late.

your radomness thread is cuter.
i hope u sell a billion records.

youre really
n
e
a
t
.

wow..
u go boooooooy!

haha
db9

"are they still influencial? still relevant?"

..that was the best statement..

 

[Saracene]

IMO, the question is not only whether a band is plugged into the world but also whether the world is plugging into the band. With U2, there's still plenty willing, it seems.

I listened to the new Radiohead album recently and my impression is that what Radiohead is principally plugged into is Radiohead. Which is not a criticism BTW; if a song's good I don't care whether an artist is plugged into the world or his/her own Planet Me.

 

[diamond]

saracene-
well put
db9

 

[BrittanyNova]

I just think they are hopelessly disconnected from what's going on in the world.

I don't get this at all! If you mean the world as in world, you have Bono crusading and meeting with world leaders, speaking to editors and stuff. If you mean music world, what do you expect them to do, go rap or boy band because it sells? U2 are doing fine as what they are so what's up with this??!!

One more comment I have about this is that Coldplay does not rawk. I was at someobody's graduation party this weekend and at least 3 dozen young people aged about 15-19 were there. The radio was on and nobody said much about the songs until Coldplay came on, then a collective groan of disgust went up from the crowd. There were gag noises and taunts of "ColdGAY," excuse me but "faggots." "pussies" "pansyasses" "wusses" and "dweebs." It was unanimous, Coldplay sucked and must go. So that doesn't sound like a band that's relevant and influential to teenagers now does it? They like the band Cold ("Stupid Girl") but not Coldplay, no way! So much for that theory.

 

[HelloAngel]

I guess it depends on who the people are, culturally, in terms of music. Youngsters like the kids you mention above who use those awful terms to describe a band would probably NOT like Coldpay - they want music as aggressive as the very language they are using.

The 19 year olds I know Coldplay.

 

[BrittanyNova]

Yeah, and some 13 year olds like U2. But what I was getting at was only that they are slow and not the kind of thing to be influential to teenagers as a whole anymore than adult comtemporary. I'm in the camp that if somebody doesn't think U2 is important, or old and slow, they're not going to point to Coldplay as being the band because they are slow 'wusses.' It's true there are all types of opinions, so U2 can't really be ruled in or out for sure, but any band with their success and longevity has to be relevant. Not to everyone, but of course, no one is because people are all so different. But no other band of U2's time is as relevant as they are!

 

[HelloAngel]

that they are slow and not the kind of thing to be influential to teenagers as a whole anymore than adult comtemporary.

That's not necessarily true. It just depends on the teenagers you know. The teens I know love Coldplay, and are tremendously influenced by them musically and emotionally. I'm not sure if it's possible to measure any group of people "as a whole" in terms of musical influence. I believe that teens that are drawn to more aggressive-sounding music and bands such as Cold would not like Coldplay, because they don't want slow or introspective music. But to say "teenagers as a whole" might not be accurate when referring to Coldplay and/or adult contemporary.

Of the 3+ years I worked at a record store, teens made up 50% of the adult contemporary sales.

 

[womanfish]

One more comment I have about this is that Coldplay does not rawk. I was at someobody's graduation party this weekend and at least 3 dozen young people aged about 15-19 were there. The radio was on and nobody said much about the songs until Coldplay came on, then a collective groan of disgust went up from the crowd. There were gag noises and taunts of "ColdGAY," excuse me but "faggots." "pussies" "pansyasses" "wusses" and "dweebs." It was unanimous, Coldplay sucked and must go. So that doesn't sound like a band that's relevant and influential to teenagers now does it? They like the band Cold ("Stupid Girl") but not Coldplay, no way! So much for that theory.

Sorry, but you need to hang out with some new people. If everyone loves Cold more than Coldplay (sickens me to put them in the same sentence) than why did Cold's album plummet off the charts in 3 weeks and Coldplay has been notched in the top 20 for almost a year? It's not just adults buying believe me.

I remember when I was in Jr. High and High School and at that time, anything "alternative" was pretty much labeled with gay or fag or pussy, etc... REM, Smiths/Morrissey, New Order, Dinasour Jr., Smashing Pumpkins, Jesus and Mary Chain, to name a few - and then Radiohead, and yes, even U2. These people were listening to Poison and Warrant and other hair bands, or the disposable pop of the time. Who turned out to be more relevant?? Cold is Nu-metal shit, who have no relevance except beating the last bit of grunge's dead corpse.

I don't think that Coldplay "rock" at all. But they make gorgeous songs with great lyrics. nuff said.

 

[Wowy23]

I will try my best to keep a certain band name out of this thread cos I know it would annoy you all.
but I went and bought the new album by the band yesterday

after listening to it I was in awe of just what influence this band has had on the current music scene. hoards of bands pump out similar trancey, melodic pop music now, thanks to these. but nothing get better than the original.

it also occurred to me that U2 have lost almost all their influence. After Achtung Baby, U2 gradually began their decline into irrelevance.

not to say I don't enjoy the latter stuff...my favorite album just might be Pop and I love zooropa(ATYCLB is a bit of ass though)

but, if the new album is at all like the last...then, I'm not even totally sure I could continue to call them my number one band..I mean..there are SOOOOO many better albums out then ATYCLB...so many!

What do you think?
are they still influencial? still relevant?

no matter what happens in their latter years...U2 will always be the band that got me emotionally attached to music....I hope they can do something to keep my interest presently

Yesterday, I just happened to change the radio station and "I still haven't found what I'm looking for" came on. As I listened I became emotional and tears filled my eyes, as this song took me to another planet, another place I've never been. That song is so powerful, it just overwhelms and I'm a grown man. U2 has a tendency of bringing me to my knees. U2 is all about relevance.

 

[womanfish]

and just to continue a bit. Relevance and influence definitely are apples and oranges. BrittanyNova's story reminded me of a story of my own. I was at a party. age range of 20 to 30. We have parties a lot at this friends house and I knew that the music was going to be pretty much all rap. So I brought a disc I had just burned with a bunch of new stuff on it like Spoon, Dandy Warhols, The Push Stars, Idlewild, All American Rejects, Something Corporate, AFI, Ween, Fountains of Wayne, Rooney, The White Stripes, and a bunch more.

Well about halfway through the party and the endless rap, I pop it in. Suddenly people are asking whose this? who sings that? who put this CD in it's really cool. I had 4 people come up and ask me if they could get a copy of this mix.

You could add up the album sales of every artist that I had on that mix and combined they wouldn't total what Eminem sold his first week. But people liked it. They just don't have the opportunity to hear it or the initiative to go out and look and discover it.

So popularity doesn't always mean much in this day and age of Clear Channel shoving white bread pop and toned down rap down everyone's throats.

 

[BrittanyNova]

Then I guess this whole thing is pointless because there are millions of music fans in the world and they all like different things. So it doesn't matter as long as everybody has the cds they like and every artist has a market and everybody is happy. No need beating each other up over what is best because every person has their own definition of that. Time will tell who is or was not influential and speculation is useless. But time has proven U2 great already and that's good enough for me. They will rule forever and have nothing left to prove.

 

[womanfish]

Then I guess this whole thing is pointless because there are millions of music fans in the world and they all like different things. So it doesn't matter as long as everybody has the cds they like and every artist has a market and everybody is happy. No need beating each other up over what is best because every person has their own definition of that. Time will tell who is or was not influential and speculation is useless. But time has proven U2 great already and that's good enough for me. They will rule forever and have nothing left to prove.

Yes, U2 has nothing to prove if they quit. But they have something to prove every time they put out a new album. If you're in a band and you don't feel that way then you're going to either suck, or fail.

And I think it's fun to speculate and argue over who is important, and talented and influential in music - because I love music. And I don't think that everyone is happy. I think there are tons of people who are ignorant, not the same as stupid mind you, but ignorant and unaware of the great music that's out there because they are pounded over the head with Eminem, Justin, Xtina, and Pink every 20 minutes.

I say that what is being played on pop/rock radio is relevant. That is obvious because it is currently making up the popular radio landscape. But 95% of it is not influential. For example, in 1990ish, Vanilla Ice was relevant, but the Beastie Boys (Paul's Boutique) was both relevant and influential.

I believe that U2 is still influential, and there are other great and talented bands out there that are influential as well. Just don't expect to hear them when you turn on Power 94 or whatever your local brand of national corporate radio is.

 

[sue4u2]

When my 25 year old son & I were talking and watching tv recently, he said that the music in a commercial that came on sounded like it was U2. My first response was they don't release their music for commercial use, I agreed it doesn't stop anyone from recording something similar. So I KNOW they are revelant He also pointed out sometime ago, that he thought Coldplay was just like U2. I couldn't understand why he thought that, but after reading this thread I guess I understand he heard something similar between the 2 that I don't. Coldplay is really good but it's nothing like the love & devotion I have to U2's sound/music. This from an untrained ear who just loves their lyrics & music and most of all causes. I can't argue what riffs and other forms of music are better than other's, but I have listened to music for all the years which have made up my life, and nothing has ever had the enduring effect on me that U2 has. and I've been around a long time as time keeps reminding me. That's all I have to go by and quite frankly, it's all I need. I can't stop listening to U2 even as others have fallen by the wayside or have just started. In other words everyone here should feel as they do about their taste in music. It's called Passion. *nite nite* I have to get up with the sun. This was all very interesting.