Mullen4Prez
Banned
Pick who is the better band//
Beatles Vs U2
- Thread starter Mullen4Prez
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
1stepcloser
Rock n' Roll Doggie
This gonna be a bit biased given this poll is on a site full of dedicated U2 fans
starvinmarvin
Refugee
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2005
- Messages
- 1,178
OK, U2 is probably my favorite "active" band, but I gotta go with The Beatles. No brainer there.
MacPhistoPT
Rock n' Roll Doggie
I prefer U2 but Beatles were the biggest band ever... so, for me U2 are better but I recognize that Beatles were bigger. I also like Beatles...
Cassis
Refugee
i've never liked the beatles
Mullen4Prez
Banned
Cassis said:
A few good songs but overall I think they are shite!
Last edited:
U2ElevatesMe415
Refugee
starvinmarvin said:
exactly.
Carmelu2fan
Rock n' Roll Doggie FOB
I like them both...They both have good songs
MsMofoGone
Blue Crack Addict
Definitely U2 !!
Now, if it was Paul McCartney ... Yes, I'd vote for him alone !!
But as for all four of them (The Beatles) ... I'm NOT a Beatles fan !!
Now, if it was Paul McCartney ... Yes, I'd vote for him alone !!
But as for all four of them (The Beatles) ... I'm NOT a Beatles fan !!
youtwohearts
New Yorker
Okay I went with the Beatles not so much because I like them better but because they paved the way for rock bands like U2. They changed the way music was made. My god people cried like babies when they saw them it was pandomonium (spelling????).
DarkAcrobat
The Fly
My vote goes to U2 , they are "My Beatles"
I love the Beatles too , they have beautiful songs, but....
My spirit only is lifted when I listen U2, no other band makes me feel so "elevated", the spiritual side of the music only works for U2, other artists never will know , the meaning of this side.
I love the Beatles too , they have beautiful songs, but....
My spirit only is lifted when I listen U2, no other band makes me feel so "elevated", the spiritual side of the music only works for U2, other artists never will know , the meaning of this side.
BrownEyedBoy
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Apples and oranges people. If the Beatles were working with the equipment U2 have now it would be different. Also, the Beatles influence U2 one way or another so there is just no comparison.
Take them for what they are and we will never know who is better in this subjective issue.
Take them for what they are and we will never know who is better in this subjective issue.
boystupidboy
Refugee
The rolling stones.
Azor
Refugee
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2003
- Messages
- 2,194
U2, U2, and nothing more than U2 
Last edited:
Azor
Refugee
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2003
- Messages
- 2,194
Rafiennes said:
BigMacPhisto
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2002
- Messages
- 6,351
Heh, I voted for The Beatles, but I'm actually shocked how many votes they've received........nearly 40% on a U2 forum......probably the next favorite band here after the Dublin Lads (although I'm sure there's plenty of R.E.M. fanatics here)....
MacPhistoPT
Rock n' Roll Doggie
BigMacPhisto said:
Pearl Jam
uwwedoogie
Rock n' Roll Doggie
I love U2 and their my favourite band but I gotta go with the Beatles, partly the reason why U2 are a band, The Edge only got into music because of Sgt. Peppers...
For Honor
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
The 8 man band of the Beatles and U2 would be unstopable...
Yes, come to the dark side.... Don't underestimate the power of the emperor....
A valuable ally you all would be...
Yes, come to the dark side.... Don't underestimate the power of the emperor....
A valuable ally you all would be...
For Honor
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
I can't really compare the two, they are completely different in meaning to me.
I like the Beatles, but they don't have the same meaning that U2 does. And the Beatles will never be duplicated in their universal appeal, but at the same time, U2 is huge.
It's kind of like comparing 1 million in silver and 1 million in gold. They are both very expensive, but, do you like gold or silver better
____________________________
hit where it hurts....
for silver and gold..........
I like the Beatles, but they don't have the same meaning that U2 does. And the Beatles will never be duplicated in their universal appeal, but at the same time, U2 is huge.
It's kind of like comparing 1 million in silver and 1 million in gold. They are both very expensive, but, do you like gold or silver better
____________________________
hit where it hurts....
for silver and gold..........
Shaliz
War Child
Definitely U2 for me. I like the Beatles, but nobody makes me feel like U2 does.
VertigoGal
Rock n' Roll Doggie FOB
considering how biased this board should be, I'm amazed at how close this is.
maybe the Beatles are better from an objective standpoint, and I do like a lot of their songs, but U2 are my favorite band. I just enjoy their music more.
maybe the Beatles are better from an objective standpoint, and I do like a lot of their songs, but U2 are my favorite band. I just enjoy their music more.
God Part III
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
boystupidboy said:
The Stones are shit. Sorry.
OK, not shit, but nothing compared with Beatles or U2.
I go for The Beatles, because in eight years they released so many incredible albums.
I mean, releasing Revolver, then Sgt. Peppers, then Magical Mystery tour, then White Album, then Abbey Road, then Let It Be (I know the latter two should be switched but thinking albums released) in just four years. No band has ever had so much creativity in them. Each of those albums are completely different from each other, and they are all totally great.
I mean, I love U2 more, but Beatles are just so great that it's spooky. And besides all that, Lennon > Bono.
God Part III
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
I'm surprised that Axver said no contest actually.
discothequeLP
Rock n' Roll Doggie FOB
Beatles were more influential, founders of rock n' roll, etc., but U2 makes better music
