Q Magazine named U2 "greatest act of the past quarter of a century"

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
I don't mind people disagreeing with me. I'd just like, and respect, someone saying "I disagree with you, and here's why...." instead of insults and telling me I'm wrong without telling me why I'm wrong. Saying "Lots of people disagree with you" is not saying anything. THAT's argumentative. If I say something you disagree with, tell me why you disagree...but merely telling me you disagree and nothing else serves what purpose? Look at Lazarus response to me...I disagree with him, but I can respect that he made an argument.

And I merely made the Rush point because you brought up longevity and live performance...both of which are things Rush is known for. And, each member of Rush happens to be incredibly talented musically. Popularity is really beside the point, but Rush actually has a pretty large world wide following...obviously no where near U2's, but few bands have that.

Nobody here insulted you. Nobody here said you were wrong. All BVS said was that there might be quite a few people disagreeing with you there. Which, frankly, appears to be the truth. Seeing how many people responded disagreeing. You're appearing to be taking on a victim role, when it's totally not needed. Nobody here is trying to get you or insult you, so why should you feel that way? We're just trying to show you a point.


I'd say a band like Coldplay or Radiohead is far more known worldwide. But I probably have no say in this as I had never heard of Rush before I got on this site and a Canadian pointed them out to me. oh and Guitar Hero, of course.
 
I said "They'd be wrong"...and then I said why. You came back with the sarcasm.

Anyway, setting aside the personal stuff, which I'm not interested in (I have no problem with people calling me on things, and showing me why I'm wrong...I want my assumptions challenged...just give me facts and examples w/o making it personal), here's an example of the kind of list I'm talking about. It's just ONE example, before anyone says yeah that's just one persons opinion, but it's pretty representative of what I'm trying to say in terms of musical influence and genre defining...a most lists are pretty similar, albeit in a different order:

The 50 albums that changed music | Music | The Observer

Pay particular attention to the "without which" section, and tell me, besides maybe Coldplay who basically just worship U2, how many bands you could say wouldn't exist "without" U2.

i particularly like where they say spice by the spice girls is one of the top 25 music changing albums of all time.
 
Should i start the list of bands who hate this band? come on,lets not be blind or deaf by our fandom here.

Sooo, because there's people who 'hate' the band that means they can't influence people anymore?

I'm quite sure people hated the U2 of 1987-1992. I'm quite sure people hated the overly conscious do-gooders of JT/RnH era. And the big rockstar change in the early 90s probably didn't go down everyone's throats well. So what exactly is your point? :huh: Cause I'm seeing none here.
 
i particularly like where they say spice by the spice girls is one of the top 25 music changing albums of all time.

No comments not the rest of the list? Just glibness?

The point about Spice Girls was about their marketing...not their music. Look at the rest of the list.

But you're not really interested in an actual conversation, are you?
 
No comments not the rest of the list? Just glibness?

The point about Spice Girls was about their marketing...not their music. Look at the rest of the list.

But you're not really interested in an actual conversation, are you?

Really? More baiting? People can just post their opinions in here. They don't have to justify them to satisfy you. :|
 
But you're not really interested in an actual conversation, are you?

Let's see, making it personal, insulting... Yeah, that's basically what this is.

I'm sorry Nick, I really did like you, but lately all you seem to do is pick fights and then go into victim mode right after someone responds to your bait. Why are you doing this? What's the point?

Yes, people were rude to you in the AB remaster debate. They have been told off for doing so. Why do you have to continue picking fights? :huh: I just don't see the point.
 
I wonder if we would seriously have the Bends or OK Computer without AB? :hmm:

I dunno, maybe. Listening back to it, The Bends has a lot of embarrassing, dated influences that do not include Achtung Baby; it's very much a product of its time production-wise. Lyrically, it's leagues ahead, but I could guess its release date within a couple of years.

As far as OK Computer is concerned:

Yorke explained that the starting point for the record was the "incredibly dense and terrifying sound" of Bitches Brew, a 1969 avant-garde jazz fusion album by Miles Davis. He described the sound of Bitches Brew to Q: "It was building something up and watching it fall apart, that’s the beauty of it. It was at the core of what we were trying to do with OK Computer."[27] Yorke has identified "I'll Wear It Proudly" by Elvis Costello, "Fall on Me" by R.E.M., "Dress" by PJ Harvey and "A Day in the Life" by The Beatles as being particularly influential on the album's songwriting.

I chuckle a bit when Interferencers suggest that Zooropa is the reason for Kid A when Yorke never mentioned the damn thing.
 
What does that have to do with anything? So if someone hates Radiohead does that mean they aren't influential?

You made a really ridiculous comment, just face it. There are bands still trying to write their NYD or SBS, yet you claim it wasn't an influential album. Pride, Bad, BD these are all songs I still hear rip offed all the time, yet you claim they weren't influential. So who exactly is deaf here?

For god sake,2 songs makes an album influential? lets get serious here...:doh:
 
Q Magazine named U2 the "greatest act of the past quarter of a century"?

Hey, that's awesome!
 
No comments not the rest of the list? Just glibness?

The point about Spice Girls was about their marketing...not their music. Look at the rest of the list.

But you're not really interested in an actual conversation, are you?

so popularity is okay with the spice girls, but not for u2, because it fits your argument better? i see.
 
agreed! Q have been REALLY into U2 for as long as they've been going pretty much. Sometimes I take Q reviews of U2 with a pinch of salt (eg. 5 star review for NLOTH, calling it 'just possibly their best album') but for the most part the relationship between U2 and that magazine is pretty healthy :lol:
 
BTW,i'm sure NME has a different view than Q about who's the greater act in the last 25 years...specialy their dislike toward U2.
 
Nick, I find your eagerness to jump into fights very disappointing.

Wow.

...

Folks, Nick66 has a strong opinion. It's okay if you don't like it or even the way he states. But don't accuse him of baiting for a fight if he is clearly willing to discuss things in a calm way with those willing to discuss it (see Lazarus and Headache).
 
I know Q is pretty much all up in U2's collective butt and other magazines (and even, maybe, other people! shocking, I know) might have another opinion.

But I still think it's neat, and like it when my favorite band gets silly little accolades like this.
 
Interference wasn't anything like this when you were in Ireland, Cori. We just like giving you something to do.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom