Have U2 lost touch with the younger generation...NO WAY

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
That's awesome :up:

I don't think they've "lost touch with the younger generation"...I'm 21 and I've loved them since I was 14/15. I know lots of people in my age group who love U2.

Silliness!
 
Uhh... I don't see how this supports the theory that they haven't.

Choosing such a song was at the discretion of whoever was the lead of that club.

Having just came out of high school last year and finishing my first year of college, I can say that U2 has certainly lost touch with the younger generation (at least around where I live).
 
LuckyNumber7 said:
Uhh... I don't see how this supports the theory that they haven't.

Choosing such a song was at the discretion of whoever was the lead of that club.

Having just came out of high school last year and finishing my first year of college, I can say that U2 has certainly lost touch with the younger generation (at least around where I live).
Click to expand...
Maybe because most teenagers listen to Jonas, Bieber, and all that.
 
Eh, no. That's 12 year olds girls.

Most of what they're listening to is Eminem, Lil Wayne, and stuff straight out of the hip hop scene.
 
I'VE lost touch with my own generation, I guess :wink:

Good thing too.

Edit: Actually, I take that back. Most people I knew even in high school were inti music that was before U2's time...Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, and the like. I don't have any friends who listen to that 'top 40' junk. And like I said, I have many friends my age who love U2.

So I guess it's not fair to judge the generation on what a portion of them listen to.
 
High school generation unfortunately has a lot of people who don't like U2...there are a bunch of exceptions but not even all of my friends (my best friend loves U2 now though ;)) The best that can be said for a lot of kids my age is that sometimes they're pretty open to new music. They at least tolerate what I like. And most who don't are usually polite enough to not outright say they hate it.
 
U2 lost touch with the younger generation at least 10 years ago. i remember Carson Daly debuting "Walk On" on TRL and getting pissed that all the kiddies didn't cheer for it.
 
mikal said:
U2 lost touch with the younger generation at least 10 years ago. i remember Carson Daly debuting "Walk On" on TRL and getting pissed that all the kiddies didn't cheer for it.
Click to expand...

True, although I do think Bomb was a temporary reconnection with Vertigo and the whole Superbowl thing.
 
If they lost connection with the younger generation, which in a way is rather logical, them being the age of those kids' parents, I wonder what generation they are in connection with. Not certainly their own. Me, being U2's generation and having been a fan for almost 30 years now feel that as from 2000 when they started making concessions to the mainstream in a desperate move to avoid being shoved into the cult band niche they were headed to after Pop, they lost connection with the essence this band was known for: never sitting back in the comfort of success and always trying to explore unknown territories. They did it after War with The Unforgettable Fire, they did it after The Joshua Tree with Achtung Baby. They raised the bid with Zooropa, Passengers and Pop and suddenly we get a string of washed-down albums (ATYCLB and HTDAAB mainly - with NLOTH we got back some of that essence) filled with lame radio-friendly stuff. I mean, I'm absolutely in favour of U2 having radio hits, but not these obvious and almost embarrassing tunes the likes of which would have been unthinkable when U2 was busier making music than trying to please audiences.
 
ultraviolet7 said:
If they lost connection with the younger generation, which in a way is rather logical, them being the age of those kids' parents,
Click to expand...

Depending on how we (or they) are defining "younger generation," they could even be much older than those kids' parents.

I mean, if we're talking about 12 year olds, it's entirely possible the band is 10 years older than the kids' parents, if not even older.
 
corianderstem said:
Depending on how we (or they) are defining "younger generation," they could even be much older than those kids' parents.

I mean, if we're talking about 12 year olds, it's entirely possible the band is 10 years older than the kids' parents, if not even older.
Click to expand...

Well, Bono's my mom's age XD which is kind of strange to think about...I'd assume it'd be closer to 5 years older for 12 year olds' parents....
 
corianderstem said:
Depending on how we (or they) are defining "younger generation," they could even be much older than those kids' parents.

I mean, if we're talking about 12 year olds, it's entirely possible the band is 10 years older than the kids' parents, if not even older.
Click to expand...

True, but from posts above they seem to be talking about kids in their late teens and early twenties. Still they could be even older than those kids' parents.
 
AnCatKatie said:
I'd assume it'd be closer to 5 years older for 12 year olds' parents....
Click to expand...

Not if the parents had kids young. Say some random kid who's 12 years old today has parents who had him at age 23. Now they're 35, and Bono is 15 years older.

Obviously, we're playing with quite a range of ages with parents of teenagers, because some people have kids at 20 and others have kids well into their 30s (and even beyond that, these days).

This thread is obviously based on a group of high school kids, but who knows what the eff the band is on about when they start talking about the "young generation" or whatever. Could include 12 year olds.
 
Oh, wow! My parents are 15 years old than the band, but I know I'm almost twice your age, so that is "late."
 
Hah, yeah. 40 years! Which could potentially explain my oddness with my connection to my sisters' generation with stuff such as U2.
 
No... They definitely have lost touched with the younger generation. Rock music in general has. There are shifting trends and its perfectly natural. Doesnt make U2 any worse or better. They should just stop trying so hard to get younger people to listen, I mean I personally wish they would, but the band should not tailor music based on new trends but rather what they as artists wish to make
 
I was speaking to some college kids last week.. they love old / retro stuff more than I remember I did (I'm 35) at 18/19/20. U2, just like Blur, Stone Roses, Primal Scream etcetc are legend bands and have a level of credibility.. don' t know how many of the would listen to NLOTH or Bomb though. The student jukebox is still full of The Doors, Hendrix and all that too .. things don't change that much. Maybe there's less good new music around today?
 
Jim said:
The student jukebox is still full of The Doors, Hendrix and all that too .. things don't change that much. Maybe there's less good new music around today?
Click to expand...

Probably, since rock isn't the major genre anymore, at least to a lot of my generation...then again, that also makes it so it's harder to find the good new music around today...it may be there, but buried under all the other crap.

I tend to just go with older music, because I don't really trust how good the new stuff is anymore...
 
cobl04 said:
there is a shit ton of good music around today, you just have to look for it...
Click to expand...

Well I think the point is that you have to look for it. And most people don't. Crap music runs the radio and is 'popular'.

It never used to be that way. Or so I think.
 
If they keep making music that comes from their heart, I could care less if they have. But based on the size of the crowds at 360 and the huge range in demographics, I'd say that's not really the case anyway. Are U2 a band that's gonna sell a ton of digital singles to teeny-boppers? No. Are there a ton of idiot teenagers that go along with the hipster bandwagon of bashing U2 and are too ignorant to see the huge influence U2 had on a lot of their favorite music? Yes. When the over-exposure settles down, U2's legacy is assured though, I only hope they can trust their creative instincts instead of trying to pander to meaningless charts, that's how the last chapters of their career will retain the critical respect of their early efforts.
 
it's funny because i asked my 15-year-old, the other night, if any of his mates are into U2... we live in France so i kind of thought there would be a chance that some French kids might be into U2 compared to England where that would be unheard of among teenagers, and he thought about it for a bit and actually said no, he couldn't think of any mates who were into U2, they "like" them and thought it was cool that we got to see them last year (although the enthusiasm did mostly come from the parents and teachers really lol)

it's not about bands keying into what's happening right now though, it's deeper than that... my son is a massive music lover, he is right up on his music history, and he is really inspired by The Clash and Bob Marley at the moment, especially The Clash... i can't put my finger on it, but their music just seems to speak to him right now and he really just connects with it, i don't know whether it's to do with teenage rage and needing loud shouty songs or what, but he is also drawn by their message - he is incredibly political and an activist compared to his peers and for his age... he likes the message behind the music... so it's not necessarily a "contemporary" or "trendy" thing for him, it's just what "connects" with him where he is at, really... he is also big into rap (Eminem and some French rappers) and thrash metal (Slipknot, The Disturbed etc.) right now as well lol he likes a huge range of music but U2 really just doesn't grab him...

he did like Moment of Surrender a lot when he saw them live last year, not one i would have expected to appeal to him, but there you go!

tbh, i haven't really played my kids much U2 at all, and i guess they've mostly just heard the latest releases/new songs as they were growing up, so they haven't really listened to much of their back catalogue, and i'm wondering how he would respond to their earlier more energetic/raw stuff... maybe i'll dig some out and see what he thinks...
 
LuckyNumber7 said:
Well I think the point is that you have to look for it. And most people don't. Crap music runs the radio and is 'popular'.

It never used to be that way. Or so I think.
Click to expand...

Oh, it's been that way for decades, but it goes in waves. It almost always has and always will.

For example my generation felt that the 90's mainstream radio was filled with great music, the late 80's had become dreadful. But would we have had PJ, Nirvana, NIN if it hadn't been for the shitty hair metal? It's very reactionary.
 
BVS said:
Oh, it's been that way for decades, but it goes in waves. It almost always has and always will.

For example my generation felt that the 90's mainstream radio was filled with great music, the late 80's had become dreadful. But would we have had PJ, Nirvana, NIN if it hadn't been for the shitty hair metal? It's very reactionary.
Click to expand...

This , people often wonder why I spend so much time searching for music.
They don't even notice how shitty the airplay on the radio's is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Phantom Dreamer
Birth of the Dragon
Replies
2
Views
787
Hewson
Hewson
lharper
New Fic: Innocent Experience - Chapter 1
Replies
5
Views
2K
lharper
lharper
youvedonewhat
The Diaries. Part 1.
Replies
13
Views
2K
lharper
lharper
youvedonewhat
The Diaries. Part 2.
Replies
7
Views
1K
BlueSilkenSky
BlueSilkenSky
jeevey
Pleasure Based Sex Education- is it insane or sensible?
Replies
9
Views
849
cobl04
cobl04

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom