Beatles Vs U2

[Axver]

I never said you'd like it!

Its a song at the their experimental best though(just entering their "Acthung Baby"/"Pop" period?). And if you compare it to what was on the charts in 1966 it's astounding

Anyway, I'm uploading now

That was weird stuff. But ... I did actually enjoy it.

 

[phanan]

Man, I haven't listened to Tomorrow Never Knows in a while. Great tune.

There is so much stuff that the Beatles experimented with at the time, and the results were absolutely astounding.

 

[thrillme]

It's hard to compare Ringo and Mullen - they're styles are so different. They're both good at what they do. Edge is a more skilled guitarist than Harrison/Lennon. Mccartney is far more skilled than Clayton in terms of bass playing, although Adam certainly looks better in drag.

Just wondering, does McCartney still regularly play bass, or only when he's performing a Beatles song?

Going by number of years, Adam picked up the bass when he was 16. He's 45 now, that's, 29 years of playing bass.

McCartney, 7 years with the Beatles, then sort of off and on since, or I dunno, I haven't followed his career.

Adam's bass teacher said he gave him "monstrous" exercises, and he'd have them down the next week.

Not that we'd ever see it, but Adam and Paul McCartney in a bass off!

How do we really know what a musician is capable of, unless they show us?

Adam's not one to show off, but I'm thinking he's probably capable of stuff that would astound even his harshest critics, but we'll never know his full potential unless he chose to show it.

I've not actually heard Seargent Peppers...in full until Live8, how was Adam's bass playing, faithful to McCartneys, a bit better, not as good as the original?

 

[Lila64]

Generally at a McCartney show, he's playing bass for most of the night. Occasionally he will play some songs on piano. The band he played with at Live8 is his current band, at least the one I saw 3 years ago, and the one I'm sure to see in November. I can't tell you, talent wise, who is better, because I'm no judge of that kind of talent. And yes, McCartney has been playing and touring ever since the Beatles broke up. Solo and with Wings ...

 

[chintito]

I doubt if U2 could get away with songs like yellow submarine these days.
The beatles attained greatness by drumming into the pubic every half arsed effort they could come up with.
U2 could have done that and wouldve surpassed the beatles a long while back if they did but chose not to.

I only hear 'Hey Jude' on the radio these days whereas U2 songs from 20 years back aswell as theyre recent stuff are still considered radio worthy. that speaks volumes for me.
OK, being on the radio isnt everything but it sure says something about the relevancy of theyre music.

The Beatles were a great band but U2 are technically and musically a better group and one with much more credibility IMO.

being the first at doing something great doesnt mean your the greatest. IMHO I think alot of people who spout the beatles greatness think along those lines.

 

[Headache]

I will be listening to more U2 in 30 years than i do the beatles now.

If i can still hear at that age

 

[thrillme]

Generally at a McCartney show, he's playing bass for most of the night. Occasionally he will play some songs on piano. The band he played with at Live8 is his current band, at least the one I saw 3 years ago, and the one I'm sure to see in November. I can't tell you, talent wise, who is better, because I'm no judge of that kind of talent. And yes, McCartney has been playing and touring ever since the Beatles broke up. Solo and with Wings ...

Oh, so he does still play bass, with or without a bass pick?

 

[JOFO]

Just wondering, does McCartney still regularly play bass, or only when he's performing a Beatles song?

yeah he plays alot of bass, some piano, and some guitar.

I've not actually heard Seargent Peppers...in full until Live8, how was Adam's bass playing, faithful to McCartneys, a bit better, not as good as the original?

he played the exact same thing, which is basically just pedaling the roots of the chords; very easy.


I would say mccartney's bass playing set the tone for most bassists who followed in a way; think of "Come Together", "A Day In The Life", "Rain", "Lovely Rita", "Something".....then think of Adams's playing on "New Years Day", "Bad"(studio), "Please", "One", or "Lemon".....

 

[U2girl]

A thread like this never really resolves anything(that's not a knock on the thread as it brings up interesting points) because music is such a subjective thing. U2 Vs the Beatles? If it comes down to who you like better then noone can tell you you're wrong.

I voted Beatles because I think their music will "Last longer" than U2s, as will their influence. Can you imagine a U2 greatest hits album selling 30 MILLION copies in 4 years, 30 years after they break up?

Some people will discount it, but the sheer amount of work the Beatles put out in 7 years is astonishing. They released More songs in that time than U2 has in 25 + years. And the fact that they released a song like "Tommorrow never knows" in 1966, just 3 years after "Love me do" is amazing. Anyone who think of the Beatles as a mere "Pop" band just needs to listen to that song. I'll be happy to send to anyone who'd like to hear.

Exactly.

I'd like to see a current band be as popular and as influential as Beatles are now, 30 years after their breakup - and a songwriter that would match Lennon/McCartney.

Actually, Beatles slowed down their album-making after they stopped touring. After 66, they only made Sgt Pepper, White album, Let it be and Abbey road - compared to Please please me, With the Beatles, A hard day's night, Beatles for sale, Help, Rubber Soul, Revolver before 66.

 

[Joshua_Tree_Hugger]

I'm surprised its so close!

U2 are miles better than the Beatles, who in my opinion are living largely on their own reputations. Did they even right their own songs? And even if they did, "It's getting better all the time, I used to get mad at my school the teachers who taught me weren't cool" hardly compares to "you asked me to enter and then you made me crawl, and I can't be holding on to what you got when all you got is hurt".

I'm not denying the Beatles' significance to music, but their songs are all poppy and dainty, and lack the real depth that U2 songs have in such abundance.

 

[U2girl]

U2 are miles better than the Beatles, who in my opinion are living largely on their own reputations. Did they even right their own songs?

Are you serious?

If there's one band that can't be overrated it's them.

 

[thrillme]

yeah he plays alot of bass, some piano, and some guitar.




he played the exact same thing, which is basically just pedaling the roots of the chords; very easy.


I would say mccartney's bass playing set the tone for most bassists who followed in a way; think of "Come Together", "A Day In The Life", "Rain", "Lovely Rita", "Something".....then think of Adams's playing on "New Years Day", "Bad"(studio), "Please", "One", or "Lemon".....

Hmm I figured Adam was influenced more by reggae type of bass playing. Well he's never mentioned McCartney as an influence, but he has mentioned Bootsy Collins, James Jamerson, Bob Marley's bassist.

 

[prisz25]

i have to agree with Joshua_Tree_Hugger.....The Beatles have an amazing influence on music but U2's songs have so much in them that the Beatles did not have....

 

[Infinity]

I doubt if U2 could get away with songs like yellow submarine these days.

Yellow Submarine vs. Vertigo

which song is sillier?

 

[Joshua_Tree_Hugger]

Are you serious?

If there's one band that can't be overrated it's them.

WHAT???

Everyone is always singing the Beatles' praises. They get way too much credit for the pop they drummed out. Musically and lyrically their music wouldn't survive if it was released for the first time today.

It just so happened that they pioneered a new era where this music was new and fresh, and as such are hearalded the world over.

 

[Lemonfix]

I'm surprised its so close!

U2 are miles better than the Beatles, who in my opinion are living largely on their own reputations. Did they even right their own songs? And even if they did, "It's getting better all the time, I used to get mad at my school the teachers who taught me weren't cool" hardly compares to "you asked me to enter and then you made me crawl, and I can't be holding on to what you got when all you got is hurt".

I don't know how to go about responding to this.

Of course the Beatles wrote their own songs. Also, why compare some of the Beatles' least complex lyrics to some of that appear in "One", one of U2's best songs, lyrically (though the particular part you quoted is pretty average.)

Musically the Beatles were doing things 30+ years ago that would still be considered great had they released them recently. The early stuff was quite simple and they quickly moved on from that. That's not to say the music of the Beatles appeals to everyone, that's fine. Just give them the respect which they deserve.

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

I only hear 'Hey Jude' on the radio these days whereas U2 songs from 20 years back aswell as theyre recent stuff are still considered radio worthy. that speaks volumes for me.
OK, being on the radio isnt everything but it sure says something about the relevancy of theyre music.

And I have heard "Hey Jude" as well as a lot more of the Beatles' songs on the radio before. That depends more on what kind of station you have than anything else.

Musically and lyrically their music wouldn't survive if it was released for the first time today.

Considering the state of music nowadays, you're probably right in the sense that they wouldn't become as famous as they are now. But I'd be willing to bet their music would get played on alternative types of stations and they'd be well-respected by the people who listen to those stations, as well as the critics.

Angela

 

[bsp77]

Anyone that rags on the Beatles should have to post their age as well. I am sure immaturity often plays a part.

 

[JOFO]

Anyone that rags on the Beatles should have to post their age as well. I am sure immaturity often plays a part.

exactly; and I'll re-iterate: I actually LIKE U2 BETTER than the Beatles; it's just that the Beatles invented a large portion of what U2 is about.
without the beatles, music would not have existed the way it did for the last 30 years.

 

[roy]

without the beatles, music would not have existed the way it did for the last 30 years.

That is beyond doubt, however, did The Beatles legacy not benefit immensely from being in the right time, right place?

 

[tiny dancer]

Definitely U2, but I do like the Beatles

 

[Sleep Over Jack]

"Strawberry Fields", "Tomorrow Never Knows" are simple pop music that would never survive today?? Sounds like someone's only heard "Love Me Do" "Can't Buy Me Love" and thinks all the Beatles tunes sound like that..



U2 are great, but they're way behind the Beatles in terms of overall influence on the musical landscape and also the number of masterpieces the Beatles came out with (at least 5 in my opinion, U2 have had two..)

 

[Infinity]

If the Beatles would have still been around today, touring and realsing records once in a while. then they wouldn't have as much as respect they do in actuality. The Beatles called it quits when they were an amazing band. If they would have been around now, they probably wouldn't be half as good as they were in the 60's and all the magic that surrounds them now wouldn't be there. They would have been like the Rolling Stones are now.

In contrast, if the Stones would have called it quits in the 70's, then they would be very respected and would be more of an influence.

The reason why bands who quit at their height are really loved and respected and often overrated is because of the mysteriousness of the fact that "what if they were still around, they would have made a lot more music for the world, now we will never hear what could have been." It is the common business rule...more demand and less supply causes value to rise. The problem is that some bands, a.k.a. The Rolling Stones, often give an oversupply thinking that they will still be at their top. So lets all hope that U2 quits making music before they become the Stones.

 

[88sundays]

I absolulty think U2 is one of the most innovative sounds in Rock history period.I mean the first time I heard "Boy" i thought "this is twenty years ahead of it's time"!but U2 lost me after Act.baby for a couple years.i remember most of my freinds who were really hard core fans just dropping off during this time but still going to see them. we sat thru POP just waitng for the good ol' stuff.They did not capitalize on taking a real chance on defining music when they had it in their hands.maybe they really did try and that was the effort they put forth but i thought it was really sub-par from the quality they had worked so hard for on the previous releases. Look at the Beatles in 1966&67..Revolver,Sgt.pepper,MagicalMystery tour..in one year they took rock music and changed it forever. If U2 would have or could have done the same maybe we wouldn't be listening to all this angst drech overplayed with such crappy lyrics all over the airwaves? oh well..BUT I love vertigo..they pulled me back and they still are one of my favorites. One of the best live bands you will ever see.I'm the crazy guy who jumps up and down when they play Elec.Co and Into the Heart. age? 40 so there you go.

 

[JOFO]

I absolulty think U2 is one of the most innovative sounds in Rock history period.I mean the first time I heard "Boy" i thought "this is twenty years ahead of it's time"!but U2 lost me after Act.baby for a couple years.i remember most of my freinds who were really hard core fans just dropping off during this time but still going to see them. we sat thru POP just waitng for the good ol' stuff.They did not capitalize on taking a real chance on defining music when they had it in their hands.maybe they really did try and that was the effort they put forth but i thought it was really sub-par from the quality they had worked so hard for on the previous releases. Look at the Beatles in 1966&67..Revolver,Sgt.pepper,MagicalMystery tour..in one year they took rock music and changed it forever. If U2 would have or could have done the same maybe we wouldn't be listening to all this angst drech overplayed with such crappy lyrics all over the airwaves? oh well..BUT I love vertigo..they pulled me back and they still are one of my favorites. One of the best live bands you will ever see.I'm the crazy guy who jumps up and down when they play Elec.Co and Into the Heart. age? 40 so there you go.

you prefer vertigo over achtung baby?
but then you say how much you would've liked them to take music somewhere when they had then chance?

umm......you've lost me.

 

[JOFO]

That is beyond doubt, however, did The Beatles legacy not benefit immensely from being in the right time, right place?

one can only wonder I guess.

 

[Lila64]

As I stated before, I just think U2 (to many) are the Beatles of our or this/their generation. If you weren't around or are possibly in your teens or twenties now, it might be harder for you to understand or grasp the enormity and talent of the Beatles and their influences on music and a culture. Lennon/McCartney = geniuses. Right place right time? Perhaps... But if they didn't have the talent,....

And I'm not saying that your opinions are right or wrong. Opinions are just that, opinions. I love U2 and their songs move me in Mysterious Ways that the Beatles don't, but there's still Something in the way.... Don't think you can really compare the two - The Beatles are in a category unto themselves... One of my fave songs by The Beatles is 'In My Life' - just a beautiful song. Remember hearing it on the radio after my Uncle passed away, and it's just a moving song. Then again maybe some of the youngsters here don't know it... Some consider it one of their best.

Think I'll throw on Dear Prudence. I have the Beatle's version, and oh look, I have U2 covering it as well

 

[namkcuR]

The Beatles are the greatest band of all time. End of story.

And this from a guy who loves U2 to the point of obsession.

 

[Lila64]

^
what he said

 

[typhoon]

Did [The Beatles] even right their own songs?

YOU LOSE AT LIFE.

THANKS FOR PLAYING.