who rocks more dave matthews band or u2!

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
This question seems misplaced considering U2 is built around mostly electric guitars. So obviously U2 would "rock harder". But I don't think there's any question that, pound for pound, Dave Matthews Band are more talented musicians. Some fans around here seem to be a little threatened by that fact. But I've played guitar for many years now and believe me, the stuff Dave Matthews comes up with is much more complex and intricate than what the Edge comes up with. And Dave Matthews himself isn't even the best musician in the band. Now having said that, I think U2 probably have a better chemistry and make up the better overall band. Too many people on here are just so childish though. Just because U2 is your favorite band, doesn't mean that no other bands are good.
 
Dave Matthews' solo stuff is surprisingly good. However, as far as the Dave Matthews BAND is concerned...:yawn:

I really don't understand all the hostility here, though. To me they are too boring to even inspire much of a reaction.
 
dmb played to 100,000 people in central park 2 summers ago - in reference to them not being popular anymore. i know u2 can do this consistantly. i guess this question of whos better is really not that great of a question bc theyre both good in there own way. u2 is better but no need to bash another quality group.
 
Back
Top Bottom