Who will sucseed U2 as the biggest band in the world?

[boosterjuice]

Coldplay are great musically. They write some damn good songs. There only problem is they have no passion in their music. No passion on the albums and no passion live in concert. When Coldplay came to Calgary, everyone at the concert was just sitting down, appreciating the music much like you would at an opera. I think we only stood up for a couple songs.

However, when U2 plays, the whole audience stands for the entire performance. The music makes you want jump out of your seat.

 

[angelordevil]

Nah...the mark of a great band is to consistently put out excellent albums..

I disagree....I think it's imperative to be great live in order to be a world-class band...and the quality should be even more stellar for supergroup status.

It's kind of like if you see an attractive woman...she may be very attractive on the outside, but it's what's in her soul that matters...at least to me (by the way girls, my phone number is 709....

I just think you'll find the soul of a great band on stage...the place where they are most vulnerable--and most human.

 

[bonosleftone]

Coldplay are great...on record. But do they have "it" live? That's another defining mark of a supergroup.

Coldplay are easily one of the best live acts in the world today. I'm by no means a Coldplay fanatic, however I've seen them 3 times at various levels in their career from a small club to an arena and they definitely have it.

They're the ones right now that have a chance to claim U2's throne as a the supergroup.

DMB are too much of a niche act playing jam rock and I loathe them completely, sure musician talent, horrible albums though and virtually no fan base outside the US, Oasis are past their prime (although a strong record can change that) again not much of a fanbase outside the UK, and Radiohead are like DMB where they have a defined fan base but they are definitely higher up the chain than either Oasis or DMB..

Coldplay and U2 are different because they can cross lines age wise and taste wise. Whether or not Coldplay can achieve the success of U2 remains to be seen.

Although an argument can be made that Coldplays first two records surpass U2's in terms of quality. No knock against Boy which is great, but October is definitely no A Rush of Blood and Parachutes is equally impressive. Coldplays first two I believe have an ageless quality to them, but U2's first two albums are definitely dated for the most part (aside from singular tracks). It will be interesting to see down the line how Coldplay's music stands up, U2 got better as time went on, and Coldplay are showing that so far IMO.

 

[beau2ifulday]

I think Coldplay are a little too reserved and a little too private to ever make it as a supergroup - they have one distinctive style, and it works for them, but can you ever see them becoming experimental? Diversifying in to dance music? Dabbling in loud, proud rock music?
No, me neither.
The music they come out with is wonderful, but ultimately, it's going to give them a short shelf life in terms of the esteem in which they're held. It doesn't mean that what they produce in the future will not be god, but you can't stay that popular today by sticking to one blueprint.

There's a simple reason why there are no super groups emerging, anyway. It's because the music industry wants hits. Record labels want hits, bands want recognition, so they stick to what will give them this. There is very little allowance for bands to do their 'own thing'. If U2 were starting out today, they'd have been dropped from their record label after 'October'.

 

[U2Kitten]

LOL, I don't know whether to laugh or cry. As soon as I saw this thread I knew I was going to see that fucking shit bore band Coldplay here and lo and behold they were the first word at the top of the page. They will NOT because, a, they suck and are boring, and b, Chris Weaselface already said he was taking 4-5 years off to raise a family and hopefully by then they will be forgotten and the band will have broken up and gone their seperate ways. Sorry for the rant. I'm just so fed up with the overglorification of a very dull and mediocre band.

 

[bonosleftone]

LOL, I don't know whether to laugh or cry. As soon as I saw this thread I knew I was going to see that fucking shit bore band Coldplay here and lo and behold they were the first word at the top of the page. They will NOT because, a, they suck and are boring, and b, Chris Weaselface already said he was taking 4-5 years off to raise a family and hopefully by then they will be forgotten and the band will have broken up and gone their seperate ways. Sorry for the rant. I'm just so fed up with the overglorification of a very dull and mediocre band.

This discussion isnt about whether or not Coldplay is good or bad. Hell, theres plenty of people who find U2 a "fucking shit bore band" and a same amount could be said that people find U2 "dull and mediocre" that's not the consensus opinion about either band. It's about which band out there has the stuff to become the biggest band in the world after U2 are done, that chance for Coldplay is definitely there. I'm not on the side of Coldplay being absolute shit because they are a good band IMO.

And 4-5 years off? No, that was Gwyneth who said that. Coldplay have a new record out in the first half of 05 with a massive tour to follow. Their marketing will be as extensive as U2's latest.

I think Coldplay are a little too reserved and a little too private to ever make it as a supergroup - they have one distinctive style, and it works for them, but can you ever see them becoming experimental? Diversifying in to dance music? Dabbling in loud, proud rock music?

Doesnt matter about being reserved. One could make an argument that Air Supply was huge in their heyday and we saw what dabbling in dance music did to U2 commercially with Pop, styles are allowed to be totally different with supergroups, hell U2 dont play Led Zeppelin's style of music or Michael Jacksons during the Thriller days. There's an audience for Coldplay's music and it exploded with A Rush of Blood and can very easily get bigger depending on their next record.

Coldplay have the album sales and the crossover appeal to be the biggest band in the world, whether a person on this board likes them or not.

I dont want them to be a supergroup, they're a good band in my eyes but that doesnt mean I think they're wonderful or Im fanatical about them but strictly from the business standpoint Coldplay are closer than any of the other bands that are out there right now, whether you like them or not.

 

[U2Kitten]

A 'supergroup' is a band made up of stars from various other bands or famous solo artists, such as Traveling Wilburys or Cream.

 

[Anirban]

after the newest jimmy eat world album, i think they could do it. they're first couple albums were definitely in a particular niche, the last one was take or leave it in terms of style, but the newest one (futures) is simply genius.

 

[mikal]

i truly believe it will be the Prodigal Junkies.

 

[bonosleftone]

A 'supergroup' is a band made up of stars from various other bands or famous solo artists, such as Traveling Wilburys or Cream.

Yea you're right on that, the technical definition.

This is more of a discussion of who will be the biggest band in the world after U2. I misused the term "supergroup" after reading it too often in this thread.

 

[Yahweh]

The era of the super group is over and it has been for a very long time now.

Look at whats at the top of the US charts it certainly isnt music made by bands, its mostly rap and Rythem and Blues. Coldplay has made a few great albums but the test will be to see if they are able to be creative in many different types of music not just music with one level or tone to it. That has been the secret to U2s longevity more then anything is that they keep changing the circumstances which they make a record.

Can I say Parachutes is that much different an album from A rush of blood to the head...no not really....but Coldplay is still in the first stages of their career so I will give them some time to show me something different.

 

[Yahweh]

All I can say is this quote is very true "The last of the rock stars when hip hop drove the big cars"

 

[xovonob now!]

Switchfoot's last album has been big on a number of contients. They're creative and fairly deep. But biggest band in the world? I just don't see it. Their songs are too inconsistent. Plus they've been around for a decade and have not produced a Joshua Tree or anything close.

It could be Coldplay.... Do they have a new recond release scheduled any time soon? If that's at all quality, maybe.

 

[indra]

no one is stepping up to the plate and wanting, thirsting for the biggest prize - world domination.

Isidore! I know what you're thinking (which is, no way in hell!) but trust me, they are, and I quote "scheming and plotting world domination." So there ya go...it's going to be Isidore!

 

[Celticfc]

I'd probably put my money on Coldplay too.

Coldplay are a great band but Chris Martin IMO doesnt have and will never have the stage presence to make them the biggest band in the world.

 

[trashdaveed]

There's a simple reason why there are no super groups emerging, anyway. It's because the music industry wants hits. Record labels want hits, bands want recognition, so they stick to what will give them this. There is very little allowance for bands to do their 'own thing'. If U2 were starting out today, they'd have been dropped from their record label after 'October'. [/B]

I can't say I agree with the last part of this statement in the least as the U2 album that most resembles what is hot in rock right now (Franz Ferdinand, The Departure -- their 2005 debut LP will undoubtedly be big....I could go on), is October. If another band released October right now, exactly as is, it would be hugely acclaimed IMO. That faster paced, 'guitary' sound is what everyone is mimicking.

 

[namkcuR]

The bands that come to mind immediatly are Coldplay and Radiohead. But I don't think it will be Coldplay because, while I think they're great, they're not 'rock', and these 'supergroups' we speak of, they're more often than not rock. I don't think it will be Radiohead because, while I think they're fucking amazing, they're not accessible and they don't want it enough.

That said, The Killers 'Hot Fuss' has it written all over it. I think this is the band to look out for.

BTW, if were to make a sort of timeline for when and from whom to whom the torch for 'biggest band in the world' was passed, would this be at all accurate?

The Beatles 1964-1970
Led Zeppelin 1970-1980
The Police 1980-1986
U2 1986-??

 

[ultrraviolette]

I doubt there will be another superband like U2, the musical climate is changing too much and like others have said--record labels don't put the time and interest into their acts in order to develop a supergroup or superband.

 

[bonosleftone]

Coldplay are a great band but Chris Martin IMO doesnt have and will never have the stage presence to make them the biggest band in the world.

Well to be blunt, you're wrong. He does have the stage presence, Excellent performer IMO. Just because he's a nice guy doesnt mean he can't lay it down when he wants to.

Coldplay are the only band right now that have even a chance of getting to where U2 are. They ARE a band that the record company is putting money and advertising behind. They have a new album coming in early 05 that Capitol is putting "Beatle-like" emphasis on promotion.

I hear this jibber jabber in this thread about "not rock enough" rock music doesnt have to be guitar centrist to make it a massive selling album. Elton John sells gazillions of records and he's in the rock and roll hall of fame.

Can I say Parachutes is that much different an album from A rush of blood to the head...no not really....but Coldplay is still in the first stages of their career so I will give them some time to show me something different.

Oh stop it seriously. You can take all of U2's albums even the so-called "artistic departures" and find something very similar in all of them. Coldplay's two albums are in the same vein, Parachutes was primarily guitar centered, while Rush went to piano driven. Coldplay's new material is supposedly more rocking than anything they've done.

All I can say is this quote is very true "The last of the rock stars when hip hop drove the big cars"

That's BS. So when U2 goes away is rock music going away? There will always be that one band that galvanizes a mass population and can sustain that. If you believe otherwise you're smoking something harsh. Quit being so one dimensional in your thinking. It's all cyclical, there will be a band to take their place.

And enough about Switchfoot, they're horrendous IMO for one, and they have had two middle of the road singles. They're freaking being marketed by a Christian label and are a niche band in that sense making pop music. I don't know anyone who doesnt laugh at Switchfoot. They've just taken over for Creed. When we play them at our station the DJ makes fun of it, you cant take them seriously when they're slanted to a Christian focus like that. It's not like U2 who are religious but dont align themselves with people trying to make money off of that angle.

I'd like to say the Killers have a shot, but one album doesnt tell us enough about their chances at longevity and sustained superstardom. I can name ten bands that had awesome debuts and then they faded into nothing.

Keep underestimating Coldplay and Chris Martin, regardless of your opinion on their music they will be around at a high level for a very long time. Hell people underestimated U2 and look where they are.

 

[mkjc]

I wouldn't count out Coldplay. They learn from the best and take good notes.

Anyway, I think the real question is can U2 fans like Coldplay if they ever get that good? I mean I like their music but at the same time I kinda struggle with liking something that sounds so much like U2. Somehow I feel I'd be happier if someone who did something completely unlike U2 would take the throne.

I think I'm starting to understand why some Beatles fans look down their noses at us.

 

[starsgoblue]

I'm really suprised that you guys think Coldplay. I like Coldplay and all but they aren't the media darlings and mega-stars internationally that U2 are.

 

[bonosleftone]

I'm really suprised that you guys think Coldplay. I like Coldplay and all but they aren't the media darlings and mega-stars internationally that U2 are.

Well no band is at that level yet, its not a question of who is, its a question of who will/can be. Coldplay definitely have the critical acclaim and record sales now, they just need their "Joshua Tree"

 

[petethechopp]

Is Coldplay bigger than Oasis was 5 or six years ago. It seems like every few years a band is labeled "the next U2", and then just kinda fades away. (I remember in the late 80's when The Charletans (sic) were going to be the next U2)
I'm not saying any of these bands aren't great, I love Oasis and most of what I've heard of Coldplay, but its hard to imagine anybody out right now is going to eclipse U2 or become as universally received and acclaimed as they are.
U2 is a once in a generation type of band like The Beatles or Led Zepplin. Those kind of bands are pretty few, I think

 

[ADecentMelody]

Coldplay's still got something to prove, in my opinion. As hard as I tried, I really didn't get into their first album. Yes, there were some great hits but the rest were subpar.

A Rush of Blood to the Head is a totally different monster. It gave me a glimpse of how they can reach the heights of U2. I'm serious. Those songs are very deep and had the same qualities as classic U2 songs. Even their b-side, See You Soon, is genius. Have you guys heard this? Have you seen their performance of it on their live DVD? It's definitely a glimmer of how great they can/will be.

Their third CD will be a telling CD.

 

[bonosleftone]

Is Coldplay bigger than Oasis was 5 or six years ago. It seems like every few years a band is labeled "the next U2", and then just kinda fades away. (I remember in the late 80's when The Charletans (sic) were going to be the next U2)
I'm not saying any of these bands aren't great, I love Oasis and most of what I've heard of Coldplay, but its hard to imagine anybody out right now is going to eclipse U2 or become as universally received and acclaimed as they are.
U2 is a once in a generation type of band like The Beatles or Led Zepplin. Those kind of bands are pretty few, I think

Oasis had it after their second album. They are still massive in the UK but in the States they had it after Wonderwall, they were literally there. Sold out arenas, critical acclaim and then whammo the 3rd album came and it was a thud and the quality has gone further down since. Coldplay are in that same position now, the one thing Coldplay has up on Oasis did at that time was Oasis had their attitudes and the controversies surrounding them. Coldplay, like U2 are not controversial.

The parallels between Coldplay and U2 are there, both musically and with the activism of the frontmen etc.

You're right that theres very few of "these" bands every generation, however U2's time is closer to the end than it is the beginning, someone is going to take their place eventually. Coldplay is the best candidate right now.

As Ive said in this thread and its been agreed, this 3rd album of theirs will tell us if they'll do it. I think they have a really good shot at it, they are damn good regardless if you like them or not.

 

[MrBrau1]

See Coldplay live. They can work an arena.

 

[womanfish]

It should have been Live or Coldplay. But Live went to shit and Coldplay, while great, doesn't have the frontman charisma to go "U2 big".
I think it is the end of an era in a way. I can't think of band right now that are ready to step into those shoes. I think it will be more spread around than it has been in the past. Someone may emerge in the future, but right now it's wide open.

 

[LiveFire]

It's rare to find any artist that is able to change. Radiohead is Radiohead. They chnaged from that blah blah grunge to OK Computer and then into Kid A but I think that's where they're going to stay. If they'd come out with an electronica dance album that was great then they could be in for it.

The problem isn't just with quality. It's with longevity. Nirvana was an amazing band and really who knows if they'd have gone the way of Pearl Jam or would have forged something completely different if Cobain hadn't blown his brains out. U2 just sticks together and it gives them a tremendous advantage over a lot of bands. It's rare that you've got the talent and even when you've got the talent to have four people that work well enough together and have enough balanced sanity to go with their artistic manicness to last past four or five albums.

U2 is the David Bowie of bands. You can't do what they did by rereleasing the same style of album for twenty years.

It could happen but it's going to be very rare.

Yes The Killers are amazing but at the same time so were a lot of bands but if they don't evolve then what's the point. I was going to say them but felt stupid suggesting a band with only one album out. It really depends on so many things. You have to want it. You have to have the talent. You have to have the logevity. Most bands are lucky to even be mildly succesful at one of these things.

 

[BigMacPhisto]

The answer is undoubtedly Pearl Jam. With their own record label, reluctance to do videos, tour with corporate sponsors, or even make many public appearances, PJ will undoubtedly be back in the mainstream soon.

 

[Aardvark747]

DIMMU BORGIR!! Norways Finest!