Coldplay X&Y: Best U2 record U2 never made. I miss U2

[namkcuR]

I see your point of view, but I think we should wait till X&Y is released to see if they've gotten any more uptempo or not. If they could make some real rockers, they'd be unstoppable. Word is that most of the album is downtempo though, which disappoints me in a way. In any case it's still very very early to judge them--they have tons of potential and are releasing only their 3rd album. Basically in terms of years they are at the same point U2 was at in 1985, so they still have a lot of time to grow as a band.

I agree with the points you are making, but here is my main question/skeptisism with Coldplay...I like their music, it's well-written and it's nice to listen to, but it's not challenging. It's not challenging because there is little expirimentation. U2, at their core, have always been an expirimental band - like Bono has said, songs like SBS, NYD, Bad, WOWY, TUF, Streets, Still Haven't Found, MW(to not even mention Zooropa and Pop) sound normal now because they're staples, but they were unusual when they were released - and through 'Pop' and arguabley further than that, they have let their music evolve on every record and have made 'new sounds' on every record. That, to me, is one of the marks that any really great band makes. Beatles did it, Led Zep did it, Doors did it, Radiohead are doing it, etc etc etc. Now, Coldplay have are only just releasing their third record, and I will reserve full judgement until after I have heard X&Y, but I just have a gut feeling that Coldplay are not the type of band to take risks, to go exploring for that 'new sound' every record. I will say that that is partially because, like Bono said at the RARHOF, today's record industry would end Coldplay if it made a 'new sound' and it didn't sell well, but the point still stands. I need to hear evolution and restlessness and yearning and the band's inability to be content in the music if I am to think a band is great, and so far I haven't heard that in Coldplay yet. Perhaps X&Y will change my mind, time will tell. But I'm not holding my breath.

 

[ImOuttaControl]

I agree with the points you are making, but here is my main question/skeptisism with Coldplay...I like their music, it's well-written and it's nice to listen to, but it's not challenging. It's not challenging because there is little expirimentation. U2, at their core, have always been an expirimental band - like Bono has said, songs like SBS, NYD, Bad, WOWY, TUF, Streets, Still Haven't Found, MW(to not even mention Zooropa and Pop) sound normal now because they're staples, but they were unusual when they were released - and through 'Pop' and arguabley further than that, they have let their music evolve on every record and have made 'new sounds' on every record. That, to me, is one of the marks that any really great band makes. Beatles did it, Led Zep did it, Doors did it, Radiohead are doing it, etc etc etc. Now, Coldplay have are only just releasing their third record, and I will reserve full judgement until after I have heard X&Y, but I just have a gut feeling that Coldplay are not the type of band to take risks, to go exploring for that 'new sound' every record. I will say that that is partially because, like Bono said at the RARHOF, today's record industry would end Coldplay if it made a 'new sound' and it didn't sell well, but the point still stands. I need to hear evolution and restlessness and yearning and the band's inability to be content in the music if I am to think a band is great, and so far I haven't heard that in Coldplay yet. Perhaps X&Y will change my mind, time will tell. But I'm not holding my breath.

Good post. I agree with much of what you say. The thing I think Coldplay is most known for is for "bringing back the paino" into rock/pop music. I also read that X&Y was intended to be much more experimental, but Chris Martin backed away, saying something like "it's not time to re-invent our wheel yet." I think the key is to give them time to grow as a band. U2 didn't change a whole lot soundwise between Boy/October/War---and it seems coldplay take the pages out of U2's playbook at every chance. Maybe they also are believers in the album "trilogy" idea that U2 has used.

If Coldplay release 6 albums that sound like AROBTTH, then I'll agree that they lack vision or whatever, but it's important to keep in mind that U2 didn't change their sound overnight either. It took 17 years to go from "Boy" to "Pop." Every album was a gradual change up until achtung baby. I hear some growth between Parachutes and AROBTTH, and apparently Chris Martin has "fallen in love with electric guitar" on x&y. Maybe in a few albums if they keep progressing they'll make their own Achtung Baby or Joshua Tree--only time will tell.

 

[LuvandPeace1980]

Reread my posts-- I don't think you were really able to grasp the points I was making. This is the type of defensiveness we were talking about, because you read what you wanted to and missed my points. U2 is my favorite band by far with Coldplay at a distant second, so I'm not saying this like Coldplay is my favorite band, just as someone who's not defensive about U2 inevitably having to pass the torch someday.

1. Never said Coldplay was bigger than U2.

2. At their respective points in their first 5 years of thier careers, U2 had 4 big hits with I Will Follow, Pride, Sunday Bloody Sunday and New Years Day. (although I would argue that IWF wasn't a huge hit at the time, maybe only in the UK)
Coldplay has had 6 with Yellow, Trouble, Clocks, The Scientist, In My Place and Speed of Sound, all of which have been huge hits. That's even before the release of their 3rd album.

3. I'd say that Coldplay has pretty much conquered America, considering "Speed of Sound" made its debut at #8 on the U.S. charts--the first British band to accomplish this feat since The Beatles released "Hey Jude" in 1968.

4. Again, read what I wrote. Sex appeal has a lot to do with youth--U2 aren't exactly spring chickens anymore. They simply don't appeal to the under 20 crowd like they used to. Coldplay does.

5. Your last point is totally subjective. Songs like Politik, Yellow and Clocks pack a ton of emotion IMO. Why does music have to be proactive to be good? One, The Fly, Gone, With Or Without You, Vertigo, Sometimes, Until The End of the World, Stay...ect are among U2's best songs, yet they don't really inspire me to get off my ass and "do something good."

I COMPLETELY AGREE! Of course I am defensive, it kind of shits you when someone comes on here and starts crapping on about how some new album is going to be putting Coldplay on the same pedistall as U2.
There is alot of Heresy going on about X&Y before it's even released. And as you said it's suppose to be down tempo and if that's the case it's gonna be dissapointing for me.

WARNING!!!
The below quote may offend some!

"""""3. I'd say that Coldplay has pretty much conquered America, considering "Speed of Sound" made its debut at #8 on the U.S. charts--the first British band to accomplish this feat since The Beatles released "Hey Jude" in 1968.""""""

What I meant by conquering America was not chart singles, I mean as in a whole, they had the albums the tours they were also controversial. In 1985 U2 had about 5 tours by that stage. Your measurement techniques put other bands other than Coldplay in the same league as U2.. ie: Matchbox 20 and No Doubt. U2 had also done Live Aid, Red Rocks and had a huge cult following, which is owed to there touring.

I also never stated that Coldplay's songs have to be pro-active to have to be good, I like there songs the way they are and I think they are beautiful. I also never stated Colplays were crap because it's not pro-active. What I am saying is because they lack that big huge rock sound and aggresiveness that makes you want to get up and want to do something about this fucked up workd. Coldplay songs so far are Melon Colies, alot of them are downer songs, not fighter songs!
One and The Fly are extremely pro-active songs, One is about a gay guy telling his dad for the first time he is gay and it's a conversation between the two! I agree it's not the most jumpy song. But.. where are coldplays pro-active songs? Whats going to make them be remembered, what is their legacy?
and about The FLY??? That song has a framework like no other(lyrically). It's about the media and it has a sound which completely makes you want to jump around.
Songs like Sunday Bloody Sunday, New Years Day, Pride, Where The Streets Have No Name, Even Better Than The Real Thing, Elevation, Beautiful Day, Mysterious Ways. Plus all those others which were never released as singles..

Out of all the songs that you listed which were hits with Coldplay I would have only mentioned Clocks and Yellow as big hits and they lack that focus and energy I mentioned. I love The Scientist and In My Place, but are they going to be played on the radio in 5 years...

Your right about not saying they are as huge as U2 were at this point, I am sorry that I stated such. But you did say they were at the same point, which I feel is unfounded.



Cheers Mate
WARNING!

 

[namkcuR]

Good post. I agree with much of what you say. The thing I think Coldplay is most known for is for "bringing back the paino" into rock/pop music. I also read that X&Y was intended to be much more experimental, but Chris Martin backed away, saying something like "it's not time to re-invent our wheel yet." I think the key is to give them time to grow as a band. U2 didn't change a whole lot soundwise between Boy/October/War---and it seems coldplay take the pages out of U2's playbook at every chance. Maybe they also are believers in the album "trilogy" idea that U2 has used.

If Coldplay release 6 albums that sound like AROBTTH, then I'll agree that they lack vision or whatever, but it's important to keep in mind that U2 didn't change their sound overnight either. It took 17 years to go from "Boy" to "Pop." Every album was a gradual change up until achtung baby. I hear some growth between Parachutes and AROBTTH, and apparently Chris Martin has "fallen in love with electric guitar" on x&y. Maybe in a few albums if they keep progressing they'll make their own Achtung Baby or Joshua Tree--only time will tell.

Maybe, but judging soley by 'Speed Of Sound', I'm not getting my hopes up. But hey, I could be wrong. But right now, Keane's record is exciting me more than the prospect of Coldplay's new one. 'Somewhere Only We Know' is just a great great song.

 

[LuvandPeace1980]

I agree with the points you are making, but here is my main question/skeptisism with Coldplay...I like their music, it's well-written and it's nice to listen to, but it's not challenging. It's not challenging because there is little expirimentation. U2, at their core, have always been an expirimental band - like Bono has said, songs like SBS, NYD, Bad, WOWY, TUF, Streets, Still Haven't Found, MW(to not even mention Zooropa and Pop) sound normal now because they're staples, but they were unusual when they were released - and through 'Pop' and arguabley further than that, they have let their music evolve on every record and have made 'new sounds' on every record. That, to me, is one of the marks that any really great band makes. Beatles did it, Led Zep did it, Doors did it, Radiohead are doing it, etc etc etc. Now, Coldplay have are only just releasing their third record, and I will reserve full judgement until after I have heard X&Y, but I just have a gut feeling that Coldplay are not the type of band to take risks, to go exploring for that 'new sound' every record. I will say that that is partially because, like Bono said at the RARHOF, today's record industry would end Coldplay if it made a 'new sound' and it didn't sell well, but the point still stands. I need to hear evolution and restlessness and yearning and the band's inability to be content in the music if I am to think a band is great, and so far I haven't heard that in Coldplay yet. Perhaps X&Y will change my mind, time will tell. But I'm not holding my breath.

I like your post too, it's exactly how I feel. I am pathetic with my expression skills and wish I had some better ones
I always feel bad when new bands like Colplay come up for this exact reason, I am one of the first to jump on the bandwagon when saying they will never be as big as U2, mainly because of the point you just made Namkur.
Thats being said I think the music Coldplay makes is just awesome. But what I love about U2 is the experimentation and the risk. I think what Bono said at the RARHOF has it's truth's for sure, but U2 didn't really do anything radical til they had set in stone that they were something special already.


over!

 

[intedomine]

Can't judge an album from one song.

In My Place was the first single from ROBTTH, and it's nowhere near the best track on the album. Clocks, ROBTTH, Amsterdam, Politik and Warning Sign are a lot better.

Speed of Sound is indeed typical Coldplay and rather unchallenging, but at least it sounds good.

I actually think Coldplay are qualified to not embark on a PoP or Achtung Baby or Unforgettable Fire experiment yet. They can keep on doing what they are doing for another album. Then, if they are gonna be remembered and be considered as rock and roll legends, they will need to try and do something different.

Who knows though, maybe X&Y will have an Elvis Presley in America or a Mofo on it?

 

[roy]

I quite like Coldplay but Speed of Sound is mediocre IMO.

 

[blueeyedgirl]

Firstly, the word is "melancholy". Fuckin' Smashing Pumpkins!

Now we can please stop with the Stalinist revisionism? U2 were NOT a mega band in 1985, despite their big turn at Live Aid etc. They did not have a No 1 till New Years Day (Jan 1983) in the UK and didn't get mega till 1987.

At the time of their third album (War in 1983 for those who have forgotten) they were getting flack for releasing the same old, same old stuff, Edge with his "predictable guitar sound", Bono's white flag waving "cliche", and they were getting mightily slagged off for Bono's speaker stack climbing. Now those of us on the inside knew what he was trying to do with the white flag and climbing the stacks, but from the outside.....Also it should be remembered that U2 were with a very understanding record company, who continued to nurture them for SEVEN years before they actually made Island any real, proper money. This is unfortunately completely unheard of today with the 4 mega commercial record companies.

I sometimes think we get too myopic here looking at U2 and forget to pull back sometimes and see how U2 looks from afar. They weren't always big, and they aren't always perfect.

 

[LuvandPeace1980]

I sometimes think we get too myopic here looking at U2 and forget to pull back sometimes and see how U2 looks from afar. They weren't always big, and they aren't always perfect.

We never said U2 were always big, but they were bigger after 5 years than what Coldplay is now. And we certainly never said U2 was perfect. U2 will be the first to admit that

 

[blueeyedgirl]

I actually take issue with the statement that U2 were bigger in 1985 than Coldplay is now, but I can't be arsed to look up figures. Look I love U2, we all do, but I don't really care if Coldplay, Christina or Weird Al Yankovic sell more records and are more respected.

I liked U2 way back when, when none of my friends knew who they were, and I like them now, when nearly all of my friends think they're over-rated.

I like Coldplay a lot, for the record.

 

[mhowells]

Coldplay X&Y: Best U2 record U2 never made, I miss U2

I have no idea how a fan group comprised 100% of U2 die hards (most normal fans wouldn't joint a fan group) can't like coldplay's newest single???? It is U2 sounding at its best! Speed of Sound is not at all manufactured, it acutally has a bridge and a pre-chorus! Crazy eh? Everything else on the radio is just verse chorus verse and that's it. Coldplays music is more involved just like U2's and that's what makes it great. It grows on you as you begin to appreciate the subtelties in the music . . .just like U2's. If we were comparing U2 with Megadeth then I could see how no one would like them, but come on guys, get a clue, Coldplay is U2 20 years ago!

 

[ImOuttaControl]

We never said U2 were always big, but they were bigger after 5 years than what Coldplay is now. And we certainly never said U2 was perfect. U2 will be the first to admit that

I think you're wrong there. U2's first 4 studio albums (keep in mind this is 20+ years after their release. I would guess the sales figures at the time were about half of what is shown here).

Boy: 3 Million
October: 3 Million
War: 8 Million
TUF: 8 Million

So, U2's first 4 albums sold about 22 million albums to date. In 1985, it was probably more like 14 million. Millions of people have bought U2's back catalogue in the last 20 years--especially after the release of the Joshua Tree. I dont have the figures to compare Red Rocks to the Coldplay Live DVD (I don't even know if that would be a fair comparison), so I'll leave it at studio albums.

Between their first 2 albums Parachutes and A Rush Of Blood To The Head, Coldplay has already sold 16 Million albums. I have no doubt that X&Y will break the 10 million mark, especially for how much it's being hyped. That will bring Coldplays 5 year total to around 26 million albums. If X&Y does hit the 10 million mark as is expected, Coldplay will have sold many more albums in their first 5 years than U2 did---even with a 20 year jump on selling their back catalogue, Coldplay will sell more in their first 3 albums than U2 did in their first 4. This doesn't make Coldplay better or anything, so don't bother with that line of thinking, but it refutes the statement that "U2 was bigger after 5 years than Coldplay is now."

 

[roy]

Re: Coldplay X&Y: Best U2 record U2 never made, I miss U2

I have no idea how a fan group comprised 100% of U2 die hards (most normal fans wouldn't joint a fan group) can't like coldplay's newest single???? It is U2 sounding at its best!

Do me a favour.

It took U2 over twenty years before they started to revist their own sound. The fact that Coldplay are (at this early stage) doing the same is rather sad and pathetic.

 

[Yahweh]

Its all the media driven hype that will get all these people out to buy the album from the so called next U2...and about 3 albums from now Coldplay themselves will be smashed by the media so they will know what U2 goes through on a regular basis these days.

Coldplay hasnt done anything they didnt do on the previous 2 albums with either Speed Of Sound or Talk....yes they sound good but they are certainly very convensional and predictable Coldplay...but maybe thats what they want them to be.

As for Coldplay live they cant even kiss the feet of U2 at this point in time and I doubt they ever will be able to...Im looking forward to the new Coldplay album but it certainly wont be anything that im not expecting.

 

[JOFO]

they have let their music evolve on every record and have made 'new sounds' on every record. That, to me, is one of the marks that any really great band makes. Radiohead are doing it,



like Bono said at the RARHOF, today's record industry would end Coldplay if it made a 'new sound' and it didn't sell well, but the point still stands.

those 2 statements are contradictory. if radiohead can do it, coldplay can too.

 

[Yahweh]

Radiohead ARENT doing it, there last 2 albums especially have in the end sold like shit.

 

[JOFO]

I quite like Coldplay but Speed of Sound is mediocre IMO.

you know I agree, but I listened to it again, a few times in a row, and I'll say if they hadn't released "clocks" first, I'd really like it alot more. the reason is: the tune is so similar in feel, rhythm, structure, and chords that it feels like they went for the easy way out for a first single.
however, I do think speed of sound has a way better chorus than clocks, which essentially didn't even have one.

 

[JOFO]

Radiohead ARENT doing it, there last 2 albums especially have in the end sold like shit.

really? I don't know any sales figures, perhaps you can find them to back up this statement.
I do know that radiohead is world famous and considered one of the best bands around today.
also, the single "there there" from the last album was the first single played on the radio since 1997's "karma police". and it was played alot too. and the video was on alot on mtv.

 

[Yahweh]

Radiohead has a total of 5 million US sales for all of there albums combined, the first 4 went platnum, and the last 2 went gold.

Comparing that to Coldplay....

Parachutes went 2 times platnum in the US and A rush of Blood to the head went 3 times platnum in the US for there total of 5 million.

The numbers really are the same around the world comparing these 2 bands....Coldplay is much more the superpower when it comes to selling records...does that mean the music is better not necessarly but the public in the end likes it better.

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

U2 is my favorite band, but Coldplay is in the position of becoming more relevant to the MTV/VH1 crowd while U2 is on their way out

I've seen U2's videos a great deal on VH1, as well as MTV2 (and apparently, MTV as well-according to a Rolling Stone magazine from around the time when "Vertigo" came out, that was one of the top 5 videos played on that channel). When I've watched those channels, I've noticed that Coldplay doesn't get nearly the video airplay on those channels that U2 does.

I'm a teacher and I can't tell you how many times my students simply don't give U2 much of a chance because "they're old!" Sex appeal and youth has always been huge factors in being relevant with younger audiences unfortunately.

So how come I've met many teenagers who do like them? You're right that there are teenagers out there who don't care for them-I've met a few. Using something like the age of an artist as a deciding factor in whether or not to like them seems rather stupid to me.

But there's also many adults who don't like U2, either-matter of fact, I think I've come across more adults who don't like them than I have teenagers. And how do you account for all the younger people who've joined this place within the last 5 years? When I got into U2 back in 2002, I was 17 going on 18. And there's many other teenagers wandering around here, too. I haven't met too many teens who are into Coldplay, but I have met quite a few who like U2.

All this being said, personally, I don't mind Coldplay. I like the songs I've heard by them so far, they've got a nice, relaxing sound, their songs have pretty music in them (so they're not exactly challenging-that doesn't matter to me. While I love challenging music, I also enjoy the simple stuff, too), and I like their new song, too. I'm not good at predicting who will and won't become the "next big thing", so I'm not going to state one way or the other whether that'll happen to Coldplay. If it does, great, if it doesn't, shame, but as long as their fans stay devoted, they should be fine.

Angela

 

[LuvandPeace1980]

I think you're wrong there. U2's first 4 studio albums (keep in mind this is 20+ years after their release. I would guess the sales figures at the time were about half of what is shown here).

Boy: 3 Million
October: 3 Million
War: 8 Million
TUF: 8 Million

So, U2's first 4 albums sold about 22 million albums to date. In 1985, it was probably more like 14 million. Millions of people have bought U2's back catalogue in the last 20 years--especially after the release of the Joshua Tree. I dont have the figures to compare Red Rocks to the Coldplay Live DVD (I don't even know if that would be a fair comparison), so I'll leave it at studio albums.

Between their first 2 albums Parachutes and A Rush Of Blood To The Head, Coldplay has already sold 16 Million albums. I have no doubt that X&Y will break the 10 million mark, especially for how much it's being hyped. That will bring Coldplays 5 year total to around 26 million albums. If X&Y does hit the 10 million mark as is expected, Coldplay will have sold many more albums in their first 5 years than U2 did---even with a 20 year jump on selling their back catalogue, Coldplay will sell more in their first 3 albums than U2 did in their first 4. This doesn't make Coldplay better or anything, so don't bother with that line of thinking, but it refutes the statement that "U2 was bigger after 5 years than Coldplay is now."

If you only judge it by album sales there is something wrong with that.. Album sales mean very little IMO. It Helps but Coldplay are no bigger than after they released Parachutes..
U2 were bigger after 5 years, they were better nown and more famous.

 

[blueeyedgirl]

I'm curious to know: does the 1980 in your username indicate your favourite U2 time or the year you were born? If it's the latter, then it may be difficult to understand that U2 in 1985 was not getting the kind of media coverage that Coldplay gets now. And this is not including the "Chris Martin marries Gwyneth" publicity (though that's obviously helped his band no end). U2 were still known in a kind of underground way, they weren't as big as the Police, for instance. Bono wasn't a household name. And as mentioned above, they weren't topping the charts regularly then.

 

[Bono's shades]

Re: Coldplay X&Y: Best U2 record U2 never made, I miss U2

I have no idea how a fan group comprised 100% of U2 die hards (most normal fans wouldn't joint a fan group) can't like coldplay's newest single???? It is U2 sounding at its best! Speed of Sound is not at all manufactured, it acutally has a bridge and a pre-chorus! Crazy eh? Everything else on the radio is just verse chorus verse and that's it. Coldplays music is more involved just like U2's and that's what makes it great. It grows on you as you begin to appreciate the subtelties in the music . . .just like U2's. If we were comparing U2 with Megadeth then I could see how no one would like them, but come on guys, get a clue, Coldplay is U2 20 years ago!

Did you hear the same song I did? I heard Speed of Sound and thought, wow, this is the exact same song Coldplay has been doing for the past five years! In other words, it sounds a tiny bit like U2 from the UF era - only with all the vitality drained out of it. And so what if it's better than what normally gets played on the radio? That's not a very high bar to cross these days.

 

[namkcuR]

those 2 statements are contradictory. if radiohead can do it, coldplay can too.

Those two statements are not contradictory. I'm saying that the great bands would go ahead and go exploring for those 'new sounds' even it was that big of a risk for them.

 

[caylan]

CP is just gettin started. Everything they do while the Gods are still around is ineviably compared to U2 by the critics who are lazy & need some controversy.

They could be the flavor of the moment or turn out to be the flavor of the century like U2. Who can predict....

Even while Michael Jordan was still playing ppl were waiting for the next MJ. Guess what, LeBron aint MJ.

 

[kakvox]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/featu...ay15,1,4102169.story?coll=chi-leisurearts-hed

 

[ImOuttaControl]

If you only judge it by album sales there is something wrong with that.. Album sales mean very little IMO. It Helps but Coldplay are no bigger than after they released Parachutes..
U2 were bigger after 5 years, they were better nown and more famous.

That makes no sense. Of course albums sales are an accurate way to measuer how "big" or famous a band is. So by that logic, a band that sold 1/10 the albums of another band could be considered "bigger???" Coldplay are no bigger than when they released Parachutes? Is that why Speed of Sound was the first single of a UK band to debut in the American Top 10 since the Beatles released "Hey Jude in 1968?"

Album sales have nothing to do with the quality of a band or an album, they have everything to do with how popular or "big" a band is. If a band isn't big, it won't sell tons of albums. If it is big, it will sell tons. Have anything to back up that U2 as bigger and more famous after 5 years? As I've already proven, album sales aren't on your side. Every bit of history I've read basically said that U2 were basically a "cult band" who was slowly becoming "big" until the Joshua Tree pushed them to superstardom.

 

[ImOuttaControl]

I've seen U2's videos a great deal on VH1, as well as MTV2 (and apparently, MTV as well-according to a Rolling Stone magazine from around the time when "Vertigo" came out, that was one of the top 5 videos played on that channel). When I've watched those channels, I've noticed that Coldplay doesn't get nearly the video airplay on those channels that U2 does.

I didn't mean to say that Coldplay gets more airplay on MTV/VH1--I was just saying that U2 will--sometime in the future--be not very relevant to this crowd. Of course Coldplay doensn't get nearly the coverage...they've had a total of about 5 videos released in the U.S. compared to U2's 30-40. Clocks, The Scientist, Yellow, In My Place all had huge airtime on MTV/VH1/MTV2. I imagine that once Coldplay releases their new album, they'll be on very high rotation.

So how come I've met many teenagers who do like them? You're right that there are teenagers out there who don't care for them-I've met a few. Using something like the age of an artist as a deciding factor in whether or not to like them seems rather stupid to me.
Angela

Stupid is correct. I play U2 all the time during our study days in class and it seems like I'm converting some of my students over. All I'm saying is that in my informal study of my students(about 100 students 16-17 years old), there are about 4 U2 fans. the majority just view U2 as a bunch of "old guys," but most admit they do like "Vertigo," "Beautiful Day" and "Elevation." On the other hand, the vast majority of my students really dig bands like Coldplay and the Killers. There is always the exception, but talk to any psychologist and they'll tell you the power of youth connecting with other youth(in this case, young bands instead of old bands).

 

[LuvandPeace1980]

I'm curious to know: does the 1980 in your username indicate your favourite U2 time or the year you were born? If it's the latter, then it may be difficult to understand that U2 in 1985 was not getting the kind of media coverage that Coldplay gets now. And this is not including the "Chris Martin marries Gwyneth" publicity (though that's obviously helped his band no end). U2 were still known in a kind of underground way, they weren't as big as the Police, for instance. Bono wasn't a household name. And as mentioned above, they weren't topping the charts regularly then.

My age has very little to do with this argument. Why would it be difficult to unserstand that U2 wasn't getting the same media coverage Coldplay is now. I know U2 weren't the biggest thing on the Planet then, but I still stick to what I am saying.
I remember Pride being played on the radio heaps, and Sunday Bloody Sunday as well.
And I remember seeing Bono @ Live Aid. Live Aid is what made U2 remembered for the Joshua Tree.
The Joshua Tree was them taking advantage of it.


If you look back , you will see some pretty huge songs, moments and tours. You can't simply put everything down to Album sales. You guys are just statistic junkies. U2 was huge back then around the world. I mean even these days people still know Pride, Sunday Bloody Sunday, New Years Day very well.. Red Rocks was made famous by U2 and LIVE AID for petes sake.
To date apart from a couple of songs and 2 albums doing well.
Your only mentioning album sales. In 4 records they only sold 22 million(according to the figures you presented), but they also had Under a Blood Red Sky which sold 8 as well.
To me that doesn't make much difference to how big U2 was.
It's more a universal thing, a charismatic thing. Record sales do mean something, but not everything! And quit harping on about that Beatles fact about them a 1968 record thats not worth smashing, LOL. If they get to #1 in the US I would consider that an accomplishment. Not some debut record which sets them at # 8. It's not likely now though as it's #21. And the second time you hear it, it gets boring!

In The UK War was #1 and #12 in the US
The Unforgettable Fire was #1 in the UK and #12 in US
Under A Blood Red Sky was # 1 in the UK and 28 in US

Cheers

 

[bedouin fire]

only facts:

u2 are the best band that ever walked the earth. they are worldwide stars for 20 years, and they kept doing the best and the most relevant music during these period. (even atyclb and htdaab that are low rated albuns on the u2 range reinforce that position).

coldplay has the best set of two first albuns ever made. that makes them great and gives them a huge potential to one day come close to the u2 status. but they are just entering now in this worldwide recognition and appeal. Let’s see in 10 or 15 years.