U2 Mirrors The Beatles.....

[ImOuttaControl]

REALY? well no! It so happens I was raised on all of their 300 songs, every one of them sounding the same... with minor diferences

Sorry, but anyone who has really heard all of the Beatles songs couldn't possibly say something so completely...well, wrong.

Hmmm...let me think...

Roll Over Beethoven
I Am The Walrus
Love Me Do
I Want You (She's So Heavy)
Help!
Norweigan Wood
Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds
Elenor Rigy
Helter Skelter
Hey Jude
Tomorrow Never Knows
Strawberry Fields Forever
Back in the U.S.S.R.
Come Together
Oh Darling!
Something
Happiness is a Warm Gun
Yellow Submarine
The entire medly on Abbey Road

Yep, you're right. They all sound almost exactly the same.

 

[Rafiennes]

What kind of argument is that?
So they were a song-writing machines... wow... can I stop being impresed now?...
That sure explains why while listening to them I feel like listening to one song over and over again... oh and don't forget this one change in music style... can I mention U2 did it from album to album?


REALY? well no! It so happens I was raised on all of their 300 songs, every one of them sounding the same... with minor diferences (oh yeah, "revolutionary back then.... but somehow I'm still not impresed...)

and to the point:
U2 are better than The Beatles!

It’s possible that you’re listening to The Beatles while keeping in mind everything you’ve heard that’s come after them. Everything that’s been influenced by them. That can taint the way someone listens to older music. Same thing with movies. I saw Citizen Kane and was like, OK…what’s the big deal. But then I thought about it in the context that before that movie, there were things that had never been done before. Same with the Beatles. Backwards masking (which seems like nothing now because we hear it all the time) used on ‘Rain’. Feedback (a staple in rock and roll) in ‘I Feel Fine’. And they took songwriting structure to a different level – they added intelligence, wit and rich melodies that get stuck in your head.

U2 has done several things along the same lines. The combination of rock and techno (Mofo). Edge’s signature guitar sound (replicated by the likes of Coldplay, The Church, and a bunch of other bands that start with a ‘C’ that I can’t think of right now) The combination of political and sexual into a song (a by product of another decent band The Clash)

I don’t even know where the whole Beatles are better than U2 argument started in this thread but I think the point that is trying to be made is this:

U2 has a lot of similarities in their career as The Beatles. For a lot of people on this board, no one band is better than the other.

But, respect should be shown for both for the waves they’ve made in the tide pool.

 

[Rafiennes]

Sorry, but anyone who has really heard all of the Beatles songs couldn't possibly say something so completely...well, wrong.

Hmmm...let me think...

Roll Over Beethoven
I Am The Walrus
Love Me Do
I Want You (She's So Heavy)
Help!
Norweigan Wood
Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds
Elenor Rigy
Helter Skelter
Hey Jude
Tomorrow Never Knows
Strawberry Fields Forever
Back in the U.S.S.R.
Come Together
Oh Darling!
Something
Happiness is a Warm Gun
Yellow Submarine
The entire medly on Abbey Road

Yep, you're right. They all sound almost exactly the same.

I often confuse Yellow Submarine and Helter Skelter

"Do you, don't you want me to love you? Cos we all live in a Yellow Submarine!"

 

[God Part III]

What kind of argument is that?
So they were a song-writing machines... wow... can I stop being impresed now?...
That sure explains why while listening to them I feel like listening to one song over and over again... oh and don't forget this one change in music style... can I mention U2 did it from album to album?


REALY? well no! It so happens I was raised on all of their 300 songs, every one of them sounding the same... with minor diferences (oh yeah, "revolutionary back then.... but somehow I'm still not impresed...)

and to the point:
U2 are better than The Beatles!

Everyone sounding the same?

Magical Mystery Tour vs. Please Please Me
Helter Skelter vs. Wild Honey Pie
Because vs. Come Together
A Day In The Life vs. I'm Only Sleeping

The Beatles made as diverse music as U2 does.
I like U2 better than Beatles, but it doesn't get better than them.

 

[TheRooster]

I've had conversations with quite a few people who dislike the Beatles or think they are overrated and a lot of times it comes down to just trying to be different. U2 somewhat resembles the Beatles, but there will never be another band that brings everything that the Beatles did to the table. What I always find amazing is that all four Beatles went on to create at least one great solo album, even Ringo. I don't think U2 could do that.

 

[bsp77]

How U2 will be remembered in 30 years?
And how all those bands from 60's and 70's are rememberd now? A crap-covers from crap-artists from time to time? With almost no one (almost) younger than 30 knowing about them?
Go on the street and ask anyone to name a few songs from those bands... you'd be lucky to get at least one...
Please...

Hmm, I am under 30, that must mean that I don't know any music from the 60's or 70's. I can think of a lot of huge bands off the top of my head (all had many hits that are still heard today).

The Beatles
Rolling Stones
The Who
Led Zeppelin
Pink Floyd
The Doors
CCR
Cream
The Byrds
The Beach Boys
Jimi Hendrix
Crosby, Stills & Nash

Maybe everybody you know under 30 is just dumb. But I do think U2 will be remembered very well in 30 years time and will be considered top 5 of all time. Just don't discount the older bands.

 

[mofo23]

I don't think that this is something that can reasonably be argued. The world was a completely different place 40+ years ago when the Beatles were at their peak. Both the music industry and the world as a whole have gone through such dramatic changes in popular culture, it is literally like comparing apples to street-cars.
To say who is better than who is just opinion. I know peoplewho would say that The Pixies are "better" than U2 and that The Clash were the most important band that ever used an amp. You could make valid arguements for almost any opinion.
You could try to base your arguements on record sales, or number one hits, or concert attendance or number of lunchboxes sold, whatever, but when it comes down to it, it is this guy's opinion against that guy's opinion.
There is no measure for greatness, you either are great or you aren't. U2 and The Beatles are great.

Buttttt... in my opinion, The Beatles are the hands down, the end all be all of modern music.

 

[The OOTS]

The Beatles accomplished what they did in 8 years.
8 YEARS!?!?!?!

If they had had the 25 year career U2 has had, who's to say how much more they would have accomplished.

And to those who think all the Beatles songs sound the same, obviously hasn't listened to the Beatles.

 

[namkcuR]

Listen, when talking about pop/rock music in a historical context, there is 'before the Beatles' and 'after the Beatles'. You can't say that about U2. The Beatles didn't just change music, they changed culture THROUGH their music. They literally changed the world, permanently.

One need only look at this list of 50+ songs, most of which are instantly or near-instantly recognizable to a mind-boggling amount of people:

Please Please Me
Love Me Do
All My Loving
Michelle
Hard Day's Night
If I Fell
Happy To Dance With You
Can't Buy Me Love
Eight Days A Week
Help
Ticket To Ride
I've Just Seen A Face
Yesterday
Drive My Car
Norwegian Wood(This Bird Has Flown)
Girl
In My Life
Taxman
Elenoar Rigby
Yellow Submarine
Here, There, and Everywhere
She Said She Said
And Your Bird Can Sing
For No One
With A Little Help From My Friends
Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds
Getting Better
A Day In The Life
Strawberry Fields Forever
I Am The Walrus
Penny Lane
All You Need Is Love
Helter Skelter
Blackbird
Back In The U.S.S.R.
Ob-La-Di-Ob-La-Da
Honey Pie
While My Guitar Gently Weeps
Happiness Is A Warm Gun
Julia
Come Together
Something
Here Comes The Sun
Abbey Road Medley
Let It Be
Two Of Us
The Long And Winding Road
Get Back
I Wanna Hold Your Hand
She Loves You
Paperback Writer
Day Tripper
We Can Work It Out
Hey Jude
Lady Madonna

 

[zwervers2]

...well, that sure was a post full of arguments and deep thoughts... I just don't know where to start...

First, if you know something, that doesn't mean everyone has to know it...
Those bands are "legends" today because they did something for the first time or had unique style, wich wasn't something special at the beggining of Rock music.

The Beatles deserve nothing more than the words that they DID start a few thing and they did a few things for the first time...
But that does NOT mean that they are better than U2,
Can't a student be better than a teacher?

The student can be better than the teacher YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT!..
but I don't think that is the isue here...The Beatles have done it all and you were the one who came up with legendary posts as..
"They had no competition". So don't give me that crap about post full of arguments and deep thoughts...

Say what you want about Lennon & Co but they have survived...and are still relevant 40 years later...man I'm actualy defending the Beatles while I'm more a stones man myself

 

[Nube Gris]

The Beatles were the first great band to hit. As the first band to hit that big, obviously there influence has to be huge. Its incredible, they are still selling records.

But U2 are the best band

Just by making such brilliant music during the course of 25 years, and being able to surpass the studio work in their live shows makes U2 the "Greatest band to ever hit the universe"

 

[BigMacPhisto]

A few other similarities that escaped me......

Both the Achtung Baby/Revolver covers are made up of collages of various photos....and War is usually pointed to as when U2 finally realized their potential, while The Beatle's third album, A Hard Day's Night, is usually listed under the same as it was the first album that they wrote all of the songs.

 

[typhoon]

The Beatles deserve nothing more than the words that they DID start a few thing and they did a few things for the first time...
But that does NOT mean that they are better than U2,
Can't a student be better than a teacher?

Sure, but thing is, U2 has yet to surpass the Beatles in a lot of ways. Look at Ruckman's list and give me a list of U2 songs recorded no more than six years apart that compares. Every album from Rubber Soul onward was a masterpiece.

People here complain about the Beatles being overrated but ignore that, uh, this place isn't exactly an unbiased judge of U2's output either. So it's funny to even discuss this here.

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

okay, this is a thread that has really a lot more to do with the beatles than U2. i'm moving it to B&C but i'm gonna be keeping a close eye on this one...

everyone please be civil. thanks!

 

[phanan]

If you went up to a random person on the street, and asked them to name all the U2 songs they know, and then asked them to name all the Beatles songs they know, chances are they will know more Beatles songs.

The Beatles changed forever the landscape of popular music.

Then again, you could argue that Elvis did too.

 

[BrownEyedBoy]

Apples and oranges. Different times, different music...

 

[Dr. Lemonseed]

I'm seeing a lot of arguments coming down to the questions of "The most influential band" or "Most important band" instead of "Better band."

Most influential. The Beatles. Go to hell anyone who says otherwise.

Best band: On what qualities? Personalities? Passion? Organic togetherness? Experimentalism? Hit singles? Sales? Endurance? Live shows?

If consensus is the answer, then the Beatles. If personal choice is, then U2.

I'd like to hear the qualities people do/don't like about the Beatles/U2 that makes them judge the other more favorably.

 

[bathiu]

But, respect should be shown for both for the waves they’ve made in the tide pool.

...but respect has nothing to do with the question here...
I respect The Beatles as much as I respect Pink Floyd, The Rolling Stones or U2...
The question is: wich band is better (well, actualy if U2 mirrors the Beatles ).

And what arguments there are?
Beatles are more influential... U2 are as influential as the Beatles from some time now - a tie.
Beatles "survived" 40 years later, true, but I don't think they are still relevant (as zwervers2 was saying) and to use it as an argument we would have to know what happens with U2 40 years after their last album...
The rest arguments come to one point realy, they were the first... so what?

U2 became better than the Beatles in AB era... all those "revolutionary" changes in Beatles' music is nothing more than changes between October and War, between War, UF and JT...

 

[intedomine]

Thing is with this argument is that (although I adore the Beatles), has society got the guts to ever come out and say that a band is actually "greater" than the Beatles.

Everyone just about accepts the Beatles as the "greatest"(which could mean a whole range of things),

...but will anyone ever be considered as "greater" than the beatles.

I think not, call it popular stubborness or arrogance, but the world will NEVER allow for a band to be considered as GREATER than the Beatles, because the world doesn't wanna mess with history.

 

[EmilyBono]

The Beatles accomplished what they did in 8 years.
8 YEARS!?!?!?!

If they had had the 25 year career U2 has had, who's to say how much more they would have accomplished.

Actually I'm in a music class @ my college and we had our "Beatles Week" recently. My prof made the point that at the end of their career, the Beatles' music was starting too veer so far off the mainstream course, that if they had stayed together, their music might have become too inaccessible - people didn't want to have to think about the music, they were ready for disco I don't know if this is an accurate prediction, I just thought it was an interesting point. But yes, they did go on to some great solo work, so who knows.

I was also raised on the Beatles, and probably by the time I was in first grade, I knew every word to tons and tons of Beatles songs - still do to this day. I rocked to Sgt Pepper all the time before afternoon kindergarten! Music will just always affect people in radically different ways.

 

[thrillme]

Thing is with this argument is that (although I adore the Beatles), has society got the guts to ever come out and say that a band is actually "greater" than the Beatles.

Everyone just about accepts the Beatles as the "greatest"(which could mean a whole range of things),

...but will anyone ever be considered as "greater" than the beatles.

I think not, call it popular stubborness or arrogance, but the world will NEVER allow for a band to be considered as GREATER than the Beatles, because the world doesn't wanna mess with history.

If that is the case, which I think you're are probably right, makes you wonder, maybe some people took John Lennons "bigger than Jesus" comment much more seriously than he meant.

One person even wrote "before the Beatles, after the Beatles"



It's funny, people tell other U2 fans to lighten up about criticisms about U2, but look at this thread, or in fact, any thread about "X band" vs. The Beatles.

You can't criticise the Beatles without a bunch of people jumping on your back telling you your wrong, your ignorant, etc. Why aren't the Who better than the Beatles? Or the Rolling Stones. Same time frame right, peers. Okay, maybe U2 are still too young to be compared to the Beatles, but the Beatles are not the be all end all of rock. I've heard plenty of their early songs, more poppy than rock.

I dunno, I suppose if this were the 60's, I'd be more of a Rolling Stones fan, than a Beatles fan.

Dr. Lemonseed : I'd like to hear the qualities people do/don't like about the Beatles/U2 that makes them judge the other more favorably.

U2 exemplify what the word "band" means. Look how long they stuck it out together, no line up changes, they do pace their album releases, but they've never broken up. They'll pack it in if they release 2 crap albums (obviously this is entirely their opinion), in a row.

Perhaps, the Beatles are more of a studio band, whereas U2 are more of live band. Is that safe to say? Not gonna burn the heretic are ye?

Oh and I was just browsing a bass forum the other night, apparently pick playing is not as highly regarded as finger playing. Paul McCartney, wasn't he more of a pick player, than a finger player.

Hehe, Adam does both, and that slap bass thing, then he does a mix of pick playing, and slap pop on Gloria. Though Beatles fans are quite safe, Adam's not going to upsurp McCartney. Though McCartney is no Jaco or Les Claypool, apparently.

I'm sure some have that Blender magazine with U2 on the cover, read the article that comes just a few pages before U2's story. About people getting sacked from bands, Pete Best almost killed himself. He was a founding member of the Beatles right? Why'd they go with Ringo?

(Obviously from my posts, I don't follow the Beatles history much)

People left the Hype and Feedback, Adam, Bono, Edge, and Larry are the ones that chose to stay. Some difference.

Huh, box isn't as lonely as I thought it would be.

Society doesn't have the guts, but a few individuals, heretics I suppose, might say it.

 

[LuvandPeace1980]

HEY HEY HEY HEY HEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I love U2 the most they are the greatest! they are fucking brilliant for gods sake and they have pushed Rock music so far.
But I will say this "Don't you ever fucking slag off the beatles!!!!!!!" they are fucking brilliant too.
If it was not for the Beatles U2 wouldn't be around(IMO) at least not respected like they are. The Beatles could have exploited what they had but they used it to do good, unlike mr Presley. The Beatles sold 160 million records in 8 years, that's unbelievable. They were it! Lennon and McCartney are great minds and if you sit down and listen to some of their works, you will find some Bono in there.
Lennon is Bono's favourite song writer and one of mine. I place the Beatles on a pedistal above the rest with U2. I like U2 more, but I could not say U2 are bigger, maybe in different departments. But if you were around when the Beatles were around you would undersatnd what Beatlemania was. But that was a different world then, so no comparisons..
The Beatles rock!!!, U2 rocks !!!

 

[the tourist]

this list of bands: 2 or 3 hit songs, classic songs... call them what you want, 2 or 3 important albums...

Amen. I know a whole one song by The Doors, I know maybe three of Pink Floyd, and although I listen to Led Zeppelin, I could hardly say they have ANY hits except for Stairway To Heaven, and that, to me, is more like Bad, which is an amazing piece of music, but not really a hit.

 

[the tourist]

I don't care if The Beatles were the influencers. U2 is better. They may not be more popular. But they are better. The may not be as original. But they are better. They may not have as many "hit" songs. But they are better. U2 has been around for over 3x the time of The Beatles.

They've defied every genre of music: rock (Hold Me Thrill Me Kiss Me Kill Me), classic rock (Bullet The Blue Sky), punk rock (Fire, I Will Follow), ambient rock (The Unforgettable Fire), epic rock (Bad, Where The Streets Have No Name), blues rock (Desire), political rock (Like A Song, Sunday Bloody Sunday, Bullet The Blue Sky, Please), Christian rock (40), pop (Pride, New Year's Day, I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For), ballad (With Or Without You, One, Stay), dance (Lemon, Mysterious Ways, Discotheque), classical (Ave Maria), jazz (Red Light, Two Hearts Beat As One), rap (numb), techno (Mofo), dark ambient (entire Passengers record), tribal (Theme From Let's Go Native), etc.

U2 is better. Hell, Radiohead is better.

 

[zwervers2]

Interesting subject...

I do feel U2 is the better band overall (preformance, songquality, emotional attachment etc)...but the Beatles have had such a big influence..only time will tell if our boys will stand the test of time.

I think they will...

Somebody posted something like: when you ask someone on the street to name some Beatles songs and some u2 songs they problably know more beatles songs than u2 songs and that is nog a bad for a band who were only together for 8 years...

let's face it: which song is u2 most famous for..It will always be the song with the openinglyrics"I can't believe the news today"...
while the beatles have so many memorable songs it's unbelievable...again I believe the u2 cataloque is a better one..

At the end of the day it is not a competition WE ARE NOT MEMBERS OF ONE OF THOSE BANDS!!

It is just personal taste. conclusion TWO SUPERGROUPS and let's all be thankfull for everything they have given us...

Scrabble

 

[alexvilagosh]

HEY HEY HEY HEY HEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I love U2 the most they are the greatest! they are fucking brilliant for gods sake and they have pushed Rock music so far.

U2 haven't pushed rock music that much.

 

[zwervers2]

[jazz (Red Light, Two Hearts Beat As One)
[/B]

Two hearts beat as one is JAZZ???


I've done the music academy so I'm curious

 

[phanan]

Amen. I know a whole one song by The Doors, I know maybe three of Pink Floyd, and although I listen to Led Zeppelin, I could hardly say they have ANY hits except for Stairway To Heaven, and that, to me, is more like Bad, which is an amazing piece of music, but not really a hit.

No offense, but the fact that you are only 20 years old or so may have something to do with that.

There are some older people here who grew up listening to artists such as Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, The Doors, and of course, The Beatles. And they most certainly could name a lot more of their songs than you.

U2 is a different generation, so why don't we just say they are the greatest band of their generation and leave it at that.

 

[TheRooster]

The sheer ignorance on this board is astounding.

 

[namkcuR]

I don't care if The Beatles were the influencers. U2 is better. They may not be more popular. But they are better. The may not be as original. But they are better. They may not have as many "hit" songs. But they are better. U2 has been around for over 3x the time of The Beatles.

They've defied every genre of music: rock (Hold Me Thrill Me Kiss Me Kill Me), classic rock (Bullet The Blue Sky), punk rock (Fire, I Will Follow), ambient rock (The Unforgettable Fire), epic rock (Bad, Where The Streets Have No Name), blues rock (Desire), political rock (Like A Song, Sunday Bloody Sunday, Bullet The Blue Sky, Please), Christian rock (40), pop (Pride, New Year's Day, I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For), ballad (With Or Without You, One, Stay), dance (Lemon, Mysterious Ways, Discotheque), classical (Ave Maria), jazz (Red Light, Two Hearts Beat As One), rap (numb), techno (Mofo), dark ambient (entire Passengers record), tribal (Theme From Let's Go Native), etc.

U2 is better. Hell, Radiohead is better.

Two Hearts and Red Light are jazz? You ever heard real jazz? And Ava Maria is not a U2 song, it is a cover, you can't possibly credit the creation of it to them.