No-one took up the mantle

[Joey788]

Alright, I've read through this thread and feel like giving my two cents to the topic.

Personally, I think the days of a U2-sized act are long over. The music scene has changed in several ways.

1. Rock is sadly out of the mainstream in the U.S. So far for 2009, only 6 rock songs have broken the Billboard top 10. Most of them are generic garbage (IMO).
2. The rock scene has become extremely fragmented by the Internet. While it's helped boost the careers of many lesser known artists, it's also created a more niche environment.
3. Many rock bands don't really want to be huge. They focus more on crafting great albums, which may be critically acclaimed but won't be played on mainstream radio. (On a side note, thank god for 101.9 RXP. They're the most daring rock radio station I've ever heard, playing songs that you'd never expect to hear on the radio. If you live in New York City, check them out.)
4. The record business is hanging on by its fingernails in the wake of the Internet. Major labels can't wait for a rock band to develop their sound over a few albums. They need instant hits to make the band profitable to keep.

I really think U2 is one of the last stadium tour sized bands around. The Rolling Stones, Bruce, Metallica, and a couple other older acts can still sell out stadiums but no one from the 90s or 2000s seem to have that great a chance. To go through some of the acts mentioned earlier:

Coldplay - I recently saw Coldplay live and was really surprised at how good they sounded. However, unless their fifth album moves off the path they've been on, this is where they'll peak

The Killers - They may have already had their peak and could be on their way down. I loved Day and Age but it didn't do anywhere near as well as Sam's Town, which in turn did worse than Hot Fuss. They'll need a stellar fourth album to turn this around. Brandon Flowers also needs to shut down his ego.

Green Day - Hit a new peak with American Idiot but they already seem to be retreading the same ground. I mean, isn't 21st Century Breakdown another album about life during the Bush era? Two albums in a row with the same theme is not a good way to increase your status.

Red Hot Chili Peppers - Great band but they're too old to make a run for the mantle. They seem to be happy with where they are.

Radiohead - The mantle may have actually been given to them during the late 90s but they left it on the ground for U2 to pick up again in 2000. Too environmentally conscious and too experimental to try a stadium tour.

Muse - I think they could succeed U2 but again, they don't really want to. Muse can play sold-out stadium shows but they haven't really cracked the U.S. yet.

That being said, I think many bands will still be able to grow to cult-status, like U2 after Live Aid. Arena concerts will be around for the foreseeable future. Stadium shows are getting to be a rare thing though. Only festivals will be able to fulfill a stadium level attendance.

 

[financeguy]

As a big a song as Wonderwall was, it was hardly generation defining and it didn't even proceed to carry them to the next level.

Respectively, it was (at least on this side of the pond), and it did, at least temporarily.

Their next album bombed horrendously.

Er, 'Be Here Now' has sold 8 million copies to date which I think is around on a par, probably ahead of, the contemporaneous U2 record 'Pop'. Whereas many people think 'Pop' sold disastrously, in fact only five U2 studio albums have sold significantly more than 'Pop'. It's around on the same level as War, UF and Zooropa and above Boy, October and, I would assume, the new one. So if a band released an album that sold more than 'Pop', that's not exactly an horrendous bombing.

I'm not saying 'Be Here Now' is a good album, mind.

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

Whereas many people think 'Pop' sold disastrously, in fact only five U2 studio albums have sold significantly more than 'Pop'. It's around on the same level as War, UF and Zooropa and above Boy, October and, I would assume, the new one. So if a band released an album that sold more than 'Pop', that's not exactly an horrendous bombing.

i think people consider it a low seller is because it followed up achtung baby, even though technically it followed up zooropa. when you stop to look at the big picture, pop and zooropa are roughly even in terms of sales, which isn't bad at all. they can't all sell 25+ million.

 

[Snowlock]

Er, 'Be Here Now' has sold 8 million copies to date which I think is around on a par, probably ahead of, the contemporaneous U2 record 'Pop'. Whereas many people think 'Pop' sold disastrously, in fact only five U2 studio albums have sold significantly more than 'Pop'. It's around on the same level as War, UF and Zooropa and above Boy, October and, I would assume, the new one. So if a band released an album that sold more than 'Pop', that's not exactly an horrendous bombing.

It's a great parallel you draw between Pop and BHN. They bombed, imo of course, not because of sales or even quality of the songs, but because they didn't meet expectations. At least in the U.S., where like it or not, that's where the icons are formed generally speaking.

U2 was coming off of Achtung Baby (zooropa and passengers both considered side projects) and Oasis was following Morning Glory. Neither filled the previous album's shoes, both bands suffered for it. U2 recovered by basically "selling out". Have they ever released an album as safe as ATYCLB (and later HTDAAB of course)? Oasis never did recover. BHN sunk them, apparently permanently. They're a heritiage act now.

 

[Snowlock]

Wonderwall took Oasis to the uppermost level of success and rock stardom, and it definitely is a generation defining song.

I'd disagree. Smells Like Teen Spirit is the defining song of Generation X. Wonderwall was a huge song, as big as "Jeremy" or "Tonight, Tonight" or "Interstate Love Song." None of those either are generation defining.

When I think back on 1987? EVERYONE was listenting to ISHFWILF.

Maybe you don't remember 95/96? Be Here Now didn't bomb, either. It sold a lot, and it received great reviews too.

It did. Ask someone in their mid twenties who is a typical music fan (not a gigantic music fan like some of us) to name a song off of it. How'd the singles do in the US?

Oasis were the biggest band in the world for a bit, and they were at U2s level. In the UK, they still are.

Oasis were huge. They were never the biggest band in the world. At the time of Morning Glory they were competing with Smashing Pumpkins, Soundgarden and Pearl Jam. All were bigger. It could be argued that Bush and STP were bigger.

Metallica released Load during this time didn't they? (Or was that '97). They were far bigger.

 

[65980]

I understand the poster is trying to say that 'compared to expectations', the LPs in question (Pop and Be Here Now) "bombed", but even by that criterion (and how do we know what various people, including the bands, expected?), I have a big problem with saying such records "bombed".

Pop received strong reviews, entered numerous charts at #1, and produced several hits. By 1998 it had sold something like 7 million albums -- there's no way I can say that is a "bomb", unless you think 99.999% of albums are bombs. You could argue that it failed to meet expectations, but even then, it still did some good business in the US, where they sold hundreds of thousands of tickets, and where it has gone platinum.

But I don't think there's any way to say that Be Here Now bombed -- it charged out of the gate as the highest-selling album in history in the UK, went straight to #2 in the USA (higher than Morning Glory), and received strong reviews, including in the USA, where readers of Rolling Stone voted it album of the year. It certainly did not harm Oasis's profile, which it actually increased in America. A couple of months after it was released, the critical backlash started in the UK, but that is typical of the British music scene, which over-inflates new artists when they appear, and then rips them apart once they peak. Be Here Now didn't really harm Oasis at all outside of Britain. What Noel Gallagher should have done in 1998 was taken the whole band over the US, settled in California somewhere where the weather was nice, and then lived there for about two years and worked the coasts and TV shows while enjoying the climate. By 2000, they would have been huge in the US, instead of nearly washed up.