Seabird
War Child
I think they will be fine with the radio play. I hear a lot of DJs bringing them up and bragging on them.
Are U2's Top40/MTV Days behind them?
- Thread starter jick
- 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.
~*Buffalo*~
War Child
Hmmmm, interesting.
From an international perspective - we don't have mtv or anything here in Australia - I wouldn't say U2 is declining commercially simply based on the success (or lack of) of their last 2 singles. I can count the number of times I heard Electrical Storm on the radio using one finger, and don't even need that for Hands. They're great songs, but I never would have heard them if I hadn't got the Best of album.
But ... I listen to at least 4 different radio stations ~ rock, top 40, contemporary and Christian ~ and U2 is on every one of them, at least once a day and usually more. What the problem is, is that there's a very limited number of songs they play, and most of those are from the 80s era from War to Rattle and Hum, plus "One", "Mysterious Ways", and "Beautiful Day".
In my opinion, some of the singles off Pop, in particular, would have been huge commercial successes had they been by any band other than U2. I think people just have this image of U2 as the "wholesome" 1980s rock band epitomised in "Pride" or "I still Haven't found what I'm Looking For". A lot of so-called U2 fans I know can't name a single song from Zooropa or Pop. Does that make U2 a failure? Certainly not. As long as they continue to affect those who take the time to appreciate their different styles of music, it won't matter how often they get played on radio or tv.
From an international perspective - we don't have mtv or anything here in Australia - I wouldn't say U2 is declining commercially simply based on the success (or lack of) of their last 2 singles. I can count the number of times I heard Electrical Storm on the radio using one finger, and don't even need that for Hands. They're great songs, but I never would have heard them if I hadn't got the Best of album.
But ... I listen to at least 4 different radio stations ~ rock, top 40, contemporary and Christian ~ and U2 is on every one of them, at least once a day and usually more. What the problem is, is that there's a very limited number of songs they play, and most of those are from the 80s era from War to Rattle and Hum, plus "One", "Mysterious Ways", and "Beautiful Day".
In my opinion, some of the singles off Pop, in particular, would have been huge commercial successes had they been by any band other than U2. I think people just have this image of U2 as the "wholesome" 1980s rock band epitomised in "Pride" or "I still Haven't found what I'm Looking For". A lot of so-called U2 fans I know can't name a single song from Zooropa or Pop. Does that make U2 a failure? Certainly not. As long as they continue to affect those who take the time to appreciate their different styles of music, it won't matter how often they get played on radio or tv.
OP
OP
jick
Refugee
Popmartijn said:Hello,
I know this post was written from an US perspective. But since this is an international forum I won't let that prevent me from misinterpreting the post.
No, U2's Top 40/MTV days aren't behind them. OK, maybe MTV doesn't play them that often now, but when they have a single out they do. Beautiful Day, SIAMYCGOO, Elevation were all on fairly high rotation. Walk On and Electrical Storm a bit less IMO. Since Hands... wasn't released as an official single I won't comment on it (although I did see it a couple of times). But they're still not written off by MTV. When their singles are charting high then MTV plays it. It's what the masses want, it keeps the viewer at the channel, it sells.
This brings me to the second point: Top 40. U2's singles still have succes. With Beautiful Day U2 had their very first #1 in the Netherlands (and with Elevation their second). Walk On and Electrical Storm also reached the top 10 (Stuck didn't came higher than #12 or so). ATYCLB was in the top 10 of best selling albums 2 years in a row. So a commercial decline? Don't think so.
In the USA Electrical Storm also wasn't the failure some think it was. Granted, it only reached #72 or so on the Billboard Hot 100 (the main singles chart), but that's a better performance than Elevation or Walk On. Even The Fly reached only #61 back in 1991. In that sense U2's chart performance on the main Billboard singles chart was always a bit overestimated. Yes, they reached the top spot twice in 1987 and have 10 or 11 top 10 hits. But there are also many singles that didn't do too much (AIWIY reached on #83, lower than Electrical Storm!). In that sense U2's chart performance hasn't changed that much.
Commercial decline? Don't bet your house on it yet.
C ya!
Marty
Sure you are talking about ATYCLB. Worldwide or US perspective, it was a smashing success in the top40 radio stations and play in music video television channels. But I was talking about Electrical Storm and Hands That Built America, which both indicate a downhill trend and that U2 is being ignored by the mainstream channels this time. Even without promotion, it should have at least matched the radio and MTV play of Sweetest Thing which was a similarly situated single that accompanied a collection. But these two new songs failed miserably at chart success or airplay.
Cheers,
J
The King Of POP
OP
OP
jick
Refugee
david said:
Some oldies who still get MTV play include bands like Red Hot Chilli Peppers and Bon Jovi. U2 should strive to still keep up with these two bands.
Cheers,
J
The King Of POP
To add to the internationality of this thread, here MTV Europe played all 4 singles from ATYCLB and ES. (I saw the video for Hands on VIVA TV - the one from U2.com I think - and a local Slovene TV a few times, but not on MTV) I heard all of these songs on local radios too.
It's true that BD was played the most (ok, played A LOT would be better put), but other 3 singles got their fair amount of MTV play too.
Maybe Hands didn't get as much airplay because it was a soundtrack song and not a "regular" album single, and maybe ES didn't because it's a "Best of" support song and not a regular album single. Having said that, I think that Sweetest thing was played more on MTV because of the more poppy/mainstream sound of the song. (IMO they were played about the same amount, maybe ST a bit more)
Considering the other bands their age, I think U2 gets played just as much as the bands jick mentioned (who has to keep up with who is a different debate IMO). Of course they get played more when singles are out.
To answer the question of the thread, no. As long as they have powerful singles radio and MTV will play them.
It's true that BD was played the most (ok, played A LOT would be better put), but other 3 singles got their fair amount of MTV play too.
Maybe Hands didn't get as much airplay because it was a soundtrack song and not a "regular" album single, and maybe ES didn't because it's a "Best of" support song and not a regular album single. Having said that, I think that Sweetest thing was played more on MTV because of the more poppy/mainstream sound of the song. (IMO they were played about the same amount, maybe ST a bit more)
Considering the other bands their age, I think U2 gets played just as much as the bands jick mentioned (who has to keep up with who is a different debate IMO). Of course they get played more when singles are out.
To answer the question of the thread, no. As long as they have powerful singles radio and MTV will play them.
sue4u2
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
Just when I thought MTV2 had some redeeming factors, it turns out they didn't air U2 videos today, and doesn't appear they will in coming days. Seems they like to change the schedule overnight or in the morning hours, even the web site listings changed. I guess one has to check daily to see if anything worth viewing is going to be on. stupid network, that MTV.
All apologies. Very sorry for the one's who may have looked for it.
by the way Happy Mother's Day to the mom's out there
All apologies. Very sorry for the one's who may have looked for it. by the way Happy Mother's Day to the mom's out there
Last edited:
david
ONE love, blood, life
MTV doesn't play Bon Jovi at all anymore. Seriously. They don't. VH1, however, does.
And you are right about MTV still playing RHCP's. But they've managed to remain youthful and almost ageless and still produce uplifting music.. They will always be able to attract a teenage demographic I guess.
And you are right about MTV still playing RHCP's. But they've managed to remain youthful and almost ageless and still produce uplifting music.. They will always be able to attract a teenage demographic I guess.
Last edited:
womanfish
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
Ok people, let's cut the crap. I don't understand people that say "I don't care if U2 is on MTV, or played on the radio. In fact I hope they don't get played because all the other music on there sucks anyway....." blah, blah, blah...
That makes my stomach turn. First of all - I want U2 on MTV and on the radio. Second U2 wants U2 on MTV and the radio. Beyond that, let's stop living in a music bubble and appreciate some of the good music that is out there. You may have to look harder for it now, but it's there. I don't want to be one of those people that lock themselves into a musical time period, never to venture out again. I would be missing awesome music from Coldplay, Audioslave, Zwan, Jayhawks, Jason Mraz, The White Stripes, AFI, Pete Yorn, etc....
Are these the most played videos or songs on TV and radio? No, but they are played and it does help people to discover them and broaden their musical landscape. I want U2 to be played so they can continue to be discovered by new generations of music fans and maybe change their lives for the better in some way.
Please let's not be so jaded...
That makes my stomach turn. First of all - I want U2 on MTV and on the radio. Second U2 wants U2 on MTV and the radio. Beyond that, let's stop living in a music bubble and appreciate some of the good music that is out there. You may have to look harder for it now, but it's there. I don't want to be one of those people that lock themselves into a musical time period, never to venture out again. I would be missing awesome music from Coldplay, Audioslave, Zwan, Jayhawks, Jason Mraz, The White Stripes, AFI, Pete Yorn, etc....
Are these the most played videos or songs on TV and radio? No, but they are played and it does help people to discover them and broaden their musical landscape. I want U2 to be played so they can continue to be discovered by new generations of music fans and maybe change their lives for the better in some way.
Please let's not be so jaded...
Bono's shades
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
womanfish said:
Good point. I don't care for my own sake if U2 gets played on MTV or the radio these days, but if they do get played and more people get exposed to them I think that's a good thing. If U2 had remained an underground band I probably never would have heard of them when I was growing up in the 1980s because I lived in a hick town and was completely unaware of what was going on musically apart from the mainstream. Sure, I know better now, but I didn't back then.
That being said, I think U2 will get plenty of attention with the new album. ES and Hands didn't do well because they weren't really promoted heavily and there wasn't a tour in support of the new Best Of. It will be different with a new studio album.
Zoomerang96
ONE love, blood, life
jick said:
what the hell is up with you beggin u2 to strive to be like bon jovi and in other threads, avril lavigne???
are you just acting stupid?
Zoomerang96
ONE love, blood, life
apparently.
The_acrobat
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
U2 and Bon Jovi shouldn't even be mentioned in the same sentence.
Jon Bon Jovi is the shittiest songwriter ever. All that "I'd die for you, steal the sun from the sky for you, I'll be the wine when you get drunk, I'll be the knife when they do surgury on your heart.... I'll be the toilet when you take a shit." Or the 20 songs he wrote using the phrase "live while I'm alive". Dumbass.
He is shit. He is around because the same people have been keeping him around. Women in their 30s that were girls in the 80's during his time. U2 are still relevant.....people get them. U2 represent something that is incredible. Bon Jovi Represent shit.
Jon Bon Jovi is the shittiest songwriter ever. All that "I'd die for you, steal the sun from the sky for you, I'll be the wine when you get drunk, I'll be the knife when they do surgury on your heart.... I'll be the toilet when you take a shit." Or the 20 songs he wrote using the phrase "live while I'm alive". Dumbass.
He is shit. He is around because the same people have been keeping him around. Women in their 30s that were girls in the 80's during his time. U2 are still relevant.....people get them. U2 represent something that is incredible. Bon Jovi Represent shit.
Zoomerang96
ONE love, blood, life
The_acrobat said:
holy shit.
i see a new me in you!
this post made my day. please continue to hurl insults at rediculous comments.
if i were still making power rankings, youd be number 1 for a month.
Bono's shades
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
The_acrobat said:
Moonlit_Angel
Blue Crack Addict
The_acrobat said:
Heh, don't let my sister hear you say that.
Apparently Bon Jovi means something to some people out there...I personally am not that into them, but...*shrugs*.
Everyone has their reasons for why they like a certain band.
Angela
Zoomerang96
ONE love, blood, life
no moonlight, your wrong. bon jovi is shit, and that is a fact.
The_acrobat
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
Zoomerang96 said:
Right on!!!!
Some of the older stuff is "DECENT", but nothing spectacular. But the fact that Bon Jovi are still around and as popular as they are is absolutely mind blowing. I mean, "Living on prayer" and some of those old hits surely aren't that great to keep them around for 20 years. And their new album........please. Just listen to the lyrics of the supposed hit song "Misunderstood". My cousin and I actually listened to that song, and we got to laughing so hard that we were crying and rolling on the floor. Those are the cheesiest lyrics ever. And the little "WHOA WHOA" thing they do with the guitar worked the first time they used it, and now it's their gimmick. AT least Edge can take pride in his signature guitar sound. All Richie Sambora can take pride in is "WHOA WHOA WHOA" for his signature guitar sound. I'll leave you all with this thought.....
I just wanna live while I'm alive
I'll live while I'm alive, sleep when I'm dead
Hear me when I say I'm gonna live my life everyday
3 different songs.
Zoomerang96
ONE love, blood, life
yes i know hes always talking about living while hes alive EVERYDAY.
what a loser.
what a loser.
jick said:
That's the funniest thing I've read in a while.
Zoomerang96
ONE love, blood, life
im quite certain hes an alter-ego (melon? ).
).
Last edited:
Popmartijn
Blue Crack Supplier
OK, I'm going to put this thread totally off balance, but I just want to give my opinion.
Keep The Faith by Bon Jovi is a great album! It's maybe their only great album, but it's a great album nonetheless.
As for everything after (and much before) that album...
C ya!
Marty
Keep The Faith by Bon Jovi is a great album! It's maybe their only great album, but it's a great album nonetheless.
As for everything after (and much before) that album...
C ya!
Marty
david
ONE love, blood, life
The other day I turned on VH1 Classic and they were showing cheesy rock videos from the 80's and this video came on and I didn't catch the band name.. But it was so funny. It started out with this loooooooooong self masturbatory intro and I think the singer was under the stage or something, then they showed the crowd a bunch of time to express the fact that there were a lot of people there or something.. Then I saw fireworks, pyro and I got scared and then all of the sudden this guy was launched out from under the stage from this ramp thing he was standing on.. I thought "holy crap! is this a band performing or is it a stunt show!?!" Okay, so after the singer landed I saw what he was wearing.. It was this weird really long multi colored trench coat that had tassles that were bright pink and I don't know. Then I saw the singers hair... It was really big. I was scared it was going to catch fire..
Then he sang.. Oh.. My.. God.. It was BON JOVI and I swear to god it was the cheesiest song ever. I think it was called "Lay Your Hands On Me?" I don't know. I just laughed my ass off at the absurdity of the fashion, the cheesy song, everything..
Then it made me remember what U2 were doing in 1987.. Earnest, low key, normal hair, honest music, something that was important.
U2 don't need to try and keep up with bands like Bon Jovi.. U2 surpassed them 15 years ago.
Then he sang.. Oh.. My.. God.. It was BON JOVI and I swear to god it was the cheesiest song ever. I think it was called "Lay Your Hands On Me?" I don't know. I just laughed my ass off at the absurdity of the fashion, the cheesy song, everything..
Then it made me remember what U2 were doing in 1987.. Earnest, low key, normal hair, honest music, something that was important.
U2 don't need to try and keep up with bands like Bon Jovi.. U2 surpassed them 15 years ago.
OP
OP
jick
Refugee
please ...
The main inquiry of this thread is whether or not U2 can still get the mainstream exposure with their new album. I don't necessarily mean the Billboard Top 40 or exclusively MTV. I am talking about top40/pop radio stations and music video channels in general. For example, ATYCLB singles didn't necessarily top every singles chart, and they all failed to break the top 20 in Billboard in America if I'm not mistaken. But it still got the exposure, airplay and interest from the mainstream music networks. But The Best Of 1990-2000 did not meet up to the sales of its predecessor worldwide. And it's two new songs did not get playing time close to what Sweetest Thing got. So my question is ...does this indicate a downward fall for U2 in terms of commercial marketability? Will they join the ranks of The Rolling Stones, etc.?
And let's not get off topic here. Never did I even try to compare U2's music to Bon Jovi or the RHCP. Simply put, there is no comparison. This is not about quality of music. This thread is about mainstream exposure and commercial marketabilty, something Bon Jovi and the RHCP have managed to keep after all this time. I hope U2 can be like these two bands in that respect, because the music listening public would benefit from U2's superior quality of music.
Cheers,
J
The King Of POP
The main inquiry of this thread is whether or not U2 can still get the mainstream exposure with their new album. I don't necessarily mean the Billboard Top 40 or exclusively MTV. I am talking about top40/pop radio stations and music video channels in general. For example, ATYCLB singles didn't necessarily top every singles chart, and they all failed to break the top 20 in Billboard in America if I'm not mistaken. But it still got the exposure, airplay and interest from the mainstream music networks. But The Best Of 1990-2000 did not meet up to the sales of its predecessor worldwide. And it's two new songs did not get playing time close to what Sweetest Thing got. So my question is ...does this indicate a downward fall for U2 in terms of commercial marketability? Will they join the ranks of The Rolling Stones, etc.?
And let's not get off topic here. Never did I even try to compare U2's music to Bon Jovi or the RHCP. Simply put, there is no comparison. This is not about quality of music. This thread is about mainstream exposure and commercial marketabilty, something Bon Jovi and the RHCP have managed to keep after all this time. I hope U2 can be like these two bands in that respect, because the music listening public would benefit from U2's superior quality of music.
Cheers,
J
The King Of POP
OP
OP
jick
Refugee
Zoomerang96 said:
I never said U2 should be like Avril. U2 can no longer appeal to the majority of the teenage girls so being like Avril goes out the window.
Apparently, Avril borrowed an idea or two from U2 with her Sk8er Boi video, doing a gig and causing traffic in downtown LA - kinda like Where The Streets Have No Name.
Also, Bono's songwriting style is different from Avril. Bono talks in riddles (see "One") so his songs are subject to multiple interpretations. Avril is a straight shooter, Sk8er Boi is a straightforward version of the rejection felt by Thom Yorke's "Creep" or the entire Nirvana "Nevermind" album. The same message is given there, Avril is just more blunt.
Now, before I veer so far off-topic, I think the straightforward songwriting approach like Avril's appeals to top40 channels because the teenage demographic don't want to think hard to absorb the song. Bono's lyrics require lots of thinking and reflection and his songs have many layers. I think the next U2 album should have straightforward lyrics and just plainly rock in its rawest form so that U2 can still somewhat stay mainstream and get the exposure they deserve. Otherwise, U2's top40/MTV days are truly behind them if they try to be too artsy and techno.
Cheers,
J
The King of POP
Zoomerang96
ONE love, blood, life
that post is dreadful.
there are so many awful things said, i will have to decunstruct them one at a time.
1. your comparing avril lavigne to u2.
2. your comparing avril lavigne to radiohead.
3. your comparing avril lavigne to nirvana.
do you know that she doesnt even write her own music??
"i think the next u2 album should have straightforward lyrics and just plainly rock in its rawest form so that u2 can still somewhat stay mainstream and get the exposure they deserve. otherwise, u2s top 40/mtv days are truly behind them if they try to be too artsy and techno."
so bono should dumb down his lyrics for the masses? theyre too hard to grasp? that was an atrocious post, your begging u2 to stay relevant at any cost - even their music.
your a frightening man, jick.
there are so many awful things said, i will have to decunstruct them one at a time.
1. your comparing avril lavigne to u2.
2. your comparing avril lavigne to radiohead.
3. your comparing avril lavigne to nirvana.
do you know that she doesnt even write her own music??
"i think the next u2 album should have straightforward lyrics and just plainly rock in its rawest form so that u2 can still somewhat stay mainstream and get the exposure they deserve. otherwise, u2s top 40/mtv days are truly behind them if they try to be too artsy and techno."
so bono should dumb down his lyrics for the masses? theyre too hard to grasp? that was an atrocious post, your begging u2 to stay relevant at any cost - even their music.
your a frightening man, jick.
Bono's shades
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
jick said:
As much as I would like to see U2 maintain its mainstream success, I would never, ever want it to be at the price of what makes the band so special in the first place. If Bono dumbed down his lyrics to sell records, I'd lose my respect for him. Besides, I don't think he needs to do this for U2 to be successful. Who would have thought that in 1987, when young people supposedly only wanted to hear the mindless lyrics of sugary pop music and hair metal, that an album like The Joshua Tree would be such a huge phenomenon?
Zoomerang96 said:
That's rude! The only FACT here is that you discount everybody who disagrees with you and label your taste fact. Even if you're joking it's not funny.
Calling Bon Jovi "shit" IS a matter of personal taste, because "shit" does not continue to have a large following for 20 years. As 2001 proved, Bon Jovi, along with U2, are the only 2 "80's" bands who still have the fans and the popularity to sell out arenas as a headliner. (RHCP did not hit big until the very late 80's so I don't count them as an '80's band'.) So even though you don't like them, it's not nice to discount the opinions of the millions of fans who love them. "Shit" may sell, but not for very long. As you can see, Britney and the boy bands are already fading, and will - yes I state this as fact not opinion- NOT still be around selling millions of records and filling arenas in 15 or 20 years. By then, dozens of other "shit" stars will have come and gone, all to be forgotten and ridiculed as U2's legend lives on and Bon Jovi is still loved. To keep fans and fame for that long, there has to be something of substance there, regardless of if it suits your personal taste or not.
Would you like me to post hot pics of Jon Bon Jovi? He's got a tight butt, gorgeous hair and a beautiful face. I'd rather look at him than listen to him
I don't like them nearly as much as U2 but I don't see what's so awful about them.
In the 80's, I had Bono and Bon Jovi on my wall. Liking U2 AND hair metal at the same time wasn't as rare as you think. I knew a lot of girls who did.
I don't like them nearly as much as U2 but I don't see what's so awful about them. In the 80's, I had Bono and Bon Jovi on my wall. Liking U2 AND hair metal at the same time wasn't as rare as you think. I knew a lot of girls who did.
Moonlit_Angel
Blue Crack Addict
U2Kitten said:
That's rude! The only FACT here is that you discount everybody who disagrees with you and label your taste fact. Even if you're joking it's not funny.
Calling Bon Jovi "shit" IS a matter of personal taste, because "shit" does not continue to have a large following for 20 years. As 2001 proved, Bon Jovi, along with U2, are the only 2 "80's" bands who still have the fans and the popularity to sell out arenas as a headliner. (RHCP did not hit big until the very late 80's so I don't count them as an '80's band'.) So even though you don't like them, it's not nice to discount the opinions of the millions of fans who love them. "Shit" may sell, but not for very long. As you can see, Britney and the boy bands are already fading, and will - yes I state this as fact not opinion- NOT still be around selling millions of records and filling arenas in 15 or 20 years. By then, dozens of other "shit" stars will have come and gone, all to be forgotten and ridiculed as U2's legend lives on and Bon Jovi is still loved. To keep fans and fame for that long, there has to be something of substance there, regardless of if it suits your personal taste or not.
Exactly.
I honestly cannot stand the Bee Gees' disco music.
But obviously there's something about it that people like, 'cause that group still has fans to this day.
Like I said, I'm not a BIG Bon Jovi fan...but I don't mind them. I actually think their These Days album isn't that bad, personally.
I remember I used to LOVE them when I was little, though. I'd get so excited when "Livin' On A Prayer" came on.
Anywho, when it comes to music tastes, to each their own, I say.
Angela
Similar threads
