AtomicBono said:
here is one of the most important points in the entire thread...U2's universal influence. We all know Chris Martin has a hard-on for U2, but who would have predicted that Linkin Park would change their sound to reflect U2's? How about Radiohead, who everyone just loves to compare to U2 negatively (y cant u2 b mor liek radohed lozlolozlolzoz56)? I'm pretty sure multiple members of the band have said positive things about U2 and they are an obvious influence (as far as I'm concerned Radiohead have always been a few steps behind U2... U2 did Achtung Baby, Zooropa, Passengers, and Pop, and then Radiohead did OK Computer, Kid A, and Amnesiac). What about all those hipster not-quite-indie bands (Interpol, The Killers, Bloc Party, etc)? What about these shitty boring pop songs I hear on the radio that have blatantly generic Edge guitar? Yes, people will say BUT U2 DIDNT MAYK THAT SOND EKO AND THE BUNIMEN DID AND JOY DIVISON LOLZOZLZ U2 DIDNT INVENT N E TING thats fine, but first off, I fully believe that U2 did create their own sound, regardless of other similar sounding bands at the time, the U2 sounds stands out from the rest - it's not just the Edge guitar tone. secondly though, U2 brought this sound to the masses. and U2 evolved. U2 is the band people will remember 50 years from now, because their influence will still be heard in music, just like the influence of The Beatles and Led Zeppelin and The Velvet Underground (not as famous, but incredibly influencial) can be heard today.
oh yeah and U2 made some decent albums too, some shit about trees and babies and leaves, that might have something to do with the whole legendary status thing. and the whole, you know, amazing live shows with groundbreaking technology and connecting with the audience and Bono going farther than any previous rock star in actually making a difference politically. Those could be factors too.
plus, they had their own iPod. that was neat.
intedomine said:
Nice post.
Another of the most important points being ignored is that perhaps U2's songs simply sound better than almost every other bands.
Maybe Stay is quite simply a more appealing song to most people than No Surprises, and more people would rather hear the sheer sweetness of the chords from One over Fake Plastic Trees.
Surely, just the mass enjoyment of U2 songs has to count for something.
mediaman44 said:i have been enjoying this discussion immensely and i am even more convinced U2 are legends. I agree with a point already made sales don't equal quality. But i was confused about a reference to leaves being a subject of U2's albums. I got the reference to trees and babies. If someone could clear that up for me i would appreciate it.
BonoVoxSupastar said:
And popularity doesn't guarantee anything.
Michael Jackson was very popular at one time.
intedomine said:
Nice post.
Another of the most important points being ignored is that perhaps U2's songs simply sound better than almost every other bands.
Maybe Stay is quite simply a more appealing song to most people than No Surprises, and more people would rather hear the sheer sweetness of the chords from One over Fake Plastic Trees.
Surely, just the mass enjoyment of U2 songs has to count for something.
gman said:Heres some facts to consider;
170M+ record sales
Sucsessful tours on a scale perhaps only the Stones can/ever will rival
Groundbreaking tours that NOBODY has come close to matching
Regarded as THE greatest ever stadium act
Been at the VERY TOP of the bizz for 20 years and still with the original line up, which i maintain is unheard of for any other band
Influencing many bands over many years
Regarded as having produced 2 of the greatest and critically acclaimed albums of a generation
I really believe that u2 will be mentioned with the greats (The Beatles and Elvis among a very select few others) long after we are gone, deeming them Legendary IMHO
LemonMacPhisto said:
The tour issue is debatable. I mean, they are definitely one of the greats, but to say they ARE the greatest is way too much of a stretch to make, at least in my opinion. Basing it on something a BBC show says is also ridiculous.
Record sales are also another point of contention, but that's been stated before.
Don't get me wrong, I love the band, they're still my favorite after discovering many other bands over a period of 2-3 years, but having a favorite band and calling them THE GREATEST BAND is ridiculous on every level. To that person they may be, but not to the other 5,999,999,999 other people in the world, you know?
I think what's also being forgotten is the people listed in that "legendary" list are the ones who influenced U2 the most, so that has to be taken into consideration. You can state facts for as much as you want, but personal opinion will sway this argument way too far for it to be taken completely serious.
LemonMacPhisto said:
Popularity and Legendary are two completely different terms by the way. You keep comparing them to different "legendary" acts to affirm them a place with them, that doesn't make any sense if you're saying that aren't claiming U2 is "the greatest band" or not.
gman said:
Ho hum!!
Al attempt to make this as clear as possible without trying to misslead anyone into thinking its a science.
IMHO, u2 will be mentioned in the same terms as The Beatles, Elvis and a few others in 100 yrs time, should makind not have wiped itself out by then!
Dont go analysing things too deeply, looking for flaws, when the only thing being done by myself and others, is replying to a posted question on a forum.