Q Magazine named U2 "greatest act of the past quarter of a century"

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
Galeongirl said:
Yes, that's totally because of MOS. Not because it is the closing song and people want to beat traffic. Like they did with 40 or whatever ending song on the Vertigo tour. Or with Walk On during Elevation.

Do you enjoy these fallacies? Because you keep making them.
Click to expand...

I'll bet you anything that if they closed their show with Streets,you wouldn't see the same amount of people trying to beat the traffic.
 
Nick66 said:
I think there's more to it than that...Bon Jovi and The Rolling Stones still sell out massive tours, but I wouldn't call them particularly relevant.

Bono said something beautiful about relevance when lamenting the (relative) failure of Pop...I'm paraphrasing, but he said that relevance is "When song changes the mood of the times it's in, when it changes the feel of the summer...we didn't do that with Pop."

I agree with him...that's what relevance is. When the song is on everyone's lips, you hear it walking down the beach, you hear it coming from the car next to you...and yes, it's on the radio all the time. But more than that...it just changes the feel and spirit of the time. That's what I think Bono wants back. Those are the "small spaces." In my opinion. :)

And, oh man, is that tough in today's music environment.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Though Bon Jovi used to be relevant until a few years ago. The Stones, yeah, that's a tricky topic. My first thing would be calling nostalgia act, then again that sets off the U2 setlist whiners. So I'll refrain.

But what Bono wants, I dono't think that's going to happen anymore sadly. Just listen to the radio these days. Only every now and then you hear a song that still truly means that. Right now I can think of only one, Somebody that you used to know by Gotye has that magic Bono desires so much. Most of the other stuff that's 'hot' is temporary trash.

I just wish he'd realise that he can still be relevant without being on the radio. He wants that special song, I say they already found it with MOS. Yet they didn't release it as a single. Why? Because they probably felt it didn't fit on the radio these days. That doesn't mean the song is any less impressive. It just means today's radio is not what it used to be. Music isn't what it used to be. Record sales are never going to be back the way they used to be. Times are changing, I wish Bono would just stop downplaying their own songs just because the 'mainstream' doesn't pick up on it.
 
LUNEDEMINUIT said:
I'll bet you anything that if they closed their show with Streets,you wouldn't see the same amount of people trying to beat the traffic.
Click to expand...

People leave during the dress change, during the encore. So yes, I saw plenty people leave BEFORE Streets on this tour. You miss the fact that most of these people are not the die hard fans most people on here are. They got GA, stand in the back, or have cheap seats. They check out a bit of the band and then be home before traffic gets mad. Or before they turn into a pumpkin, whatever's your pick.
 
I do remember It's My Life being quite big. It was a good song. Kinda strange they re-released it years later called Have a Nice Day though.
 
Galeongirl said:
Agreed. Though Bon Jovi used to be relevant until a few years ago. The Stones, yeah, that's a tricky topic. My first thing would be calling nostalgia act, then again that sets off the U2 setlist whiners. So I'll refrain.

But what Bono wants, I dono't think that's going to happen anymore sadly. Just listen to the radio these days. Only every now and then you hear a song that still truly means that. Right now I can think of only one, Somebody that you used to know by Gotye has that magic Bono desires so much. Most of the other stuff that's 'hot' is temporary trash.

I just wish he'd realise that he can still be relevant without being on the radio. He wants that special song, I say they already found it with MOS. Yet they didn't release it as a single. Why? Because they probably felt it didn't fit on the radio these days. That doesn't mean the song is any less impressive. It just means today's radio is not what it used to be. Music isn't what it used to be. Record sales are never going to be back the way they used to be. Times are changing, I wish Bono would just stop downplaying their own songs just because the 'mainstream' doesn't pick up on it.
Click to expand...

:up:

You're right about the changing nature of music...it's sadly not about "bands" and longevity anymore, it's about what's hot at the moment. I guess it's a result of record "sales" (when people actually buy them) going from albums to downloading individual tracks. Eno thinks this will all sort itself out, and that in the end it will be good for bands...he thinks there's no reason for a musician to get mega rich selling albums, and I kind of agree with him.

And man, how I agree on MOS...my single favourite 00's U2 song, and one of my top 3 from them actually. Ethereally perfect.

(Though I have to confess...I don't think Bon Jovi was EVER relevant...just popular. :))
 
U2girl said:
I think relevance is about more than mere songs.

They had it with the new Europe/AB connection. They had it with two Americas ideas for JT. They had it right after 9/11 when ATYCLB fit the mood of the times.
Click to expand...

:up:

it's something that can't be contrived or controlled, it just happens...
 
Yeah, I don't think it's going to sort itself out. There'll be the loyal fans still buying the cds, but the majority of the people download the tracks they like. That means for the band they have to change their approach. Don't release the most poppy tracks for singles. Release the one song you want people to hear. I STILL think MOS should've been the second single off NLOTH. With Breathe being number one. Boots could've been third, an edited version after the live one, and Crazy fourth. If MOS was a single, more people would've heard it, the impact would've been bigger. People would have downloaded it.

I don't think many bands these days are going to make it big on selling records. Touring is right now the way to make money. And to stay relevant in touring, you have to stand out. I'd say U2 are pretty much on top of that game right now.
 
I think what U2 have done very well is make certain genres very accessible to a wide audience. They made punk rock more accessible. Ditto new wave, and industrial. They dabbled in electronica arguably made it more popular. Of course there have been times when they've got it wrong. They failed to make dance beats accessible to a really wide audience with POP. In fact, The Fat Of The Land was the dance beat defining album of the 90s, not Pop.
But have they ever made an album that inarguably defined or changed the game of a particular musical genre? No.
 
PhilsFan said:
Dude, come on. I like Radiohead. I think In Rainbows is one of the best albums ever. I think they're more creative right now than U2, personally.

But you're measuring greatness and credibility with nothing but opinion. That's not how measuring works. You shoot down attempts to measure with numbers, yet can't see that you just sound ridiculous.
Click to expand...

You believe greatness is measure with numbers?.Then you make the point that Coldplay is greater than U2 in the last 5-6 years...if i follow that logic
 
gvox said:
Um. What?
Click to expand...

I have no idea what a dance beat album is, but Fat of the Land was definitely a big deal. I don't know what it influenced, per se...the Prodigy weren't trend-setters, but a lot of people heard it and it increased the commercial force of the genre.
 
Rocklist.net...Q Magazine Lists..

Q - 21 albums that changed music (#256 - november 2007 / t.g.v. het eerste numemr van de 21e jaargang)

And they showed up in numerous "most influential albums" lists.


I find it really odd how people are defining certain terms, it just goes to show you how subjective the whole thing is.

Kid A was a game changer, yet no one is sounding like that.

Pretty Hate Machine defined a genre, yet it inspired a bunch of wannabes.

So I think it's kinda silly to say that JT or AB didn't change the face of music, I think some of you are being way too literal.
 
I truly believe that determining influence is the best way to determine greatness, not numbers, not opinions...it tends to be comprised of sales, positive critical reception, and longevity, which are all good criteria on their own but not quite sufficient. If you're going to melt that down to one term, influence has to be it.

Assuming everyone on the forum agrees with me, we've got this straightened out.
 
LemonMelon said:
I truly believe that determining influence is the best way to determine greatness, not numbers, not opinions...it tends to be comprised of sales, positive critical reception, and longevity, which are all good criteria on their own but not quite sufficient. If you're going to melt that down to one term, influence has to be it.
Click to expand...

I agree, and I think there's no doubt that U2 has done that with several albums.(If one wants to argue that, good luck to you!)

I'm not sure how one can say that an album has influenced 100s of bands yet still not be defining, to me if you've influenced that many people with one album, then you've defined something.
 
BVS said:
I agree, and I think there's no doubt that U2 has done that with several albums.(If one wants to argue that, good luck to you!)

I'm not sure how one can say that an album has influenced 100s of bands yet still not be defining, to me if you've influenced that many people with one album, then you've defined something.
Click to expand...

I'll give you an example...by that standard, Rush has influenced a huge number of bands that have come after them, and a good number have stated so on the record (a lot of them were in the recent movie about Rush).

But I wouldn't for a second suggest that Rush changed the musical landscape in a profound way....not the way some of the other bands I listed did. There's a lot more to what I'm talking about than merely "influencing" other bands. Almost every successful band has influenced some of their contemporaries and bands that came later. That goes without saying.

Perhaps we're talking about different things, and a different standard, but if all you're saying is U2 influenced a lot of other bands to one degree or another, yeah, I agree with that. But that's not what I'm talking about.

But since we're getting nowhere with this and we're clearly not going to agree, I'll leave it at that.
 
As if there was any other choice... :wink:

But seriously, kudos to them. U2 are influential, and they've proven themselves time and time again.

What would their competition be, though? Michael Jackson is the only one that hits me immediately.
 
Nick66 said:
I'll give you an example...by that standard, Rush has influenced a huge number of bands that have come after them, and a good number have stated so on the record (a lot of them were in the recent movie about Rush).

But I wouldn't for a second suggest that Rush changed the musical landscape in a profound way....not the way some of the other bands I listed did.
Click to expand...

I would. I'm not a Rush fan, but I'm well aware of how they changed the landscape of music and influenced 100s of bands. They alone almost created this whole other cult genre.

But I think you're right, we must be talking about two different things, because I'm not sure how you can't see Rush's change to the musical landscape but somehow say that Rage did... I find that perplexing.
 
BVS said:
I would. I'm not a Rush fan, but I'm well aware of how they changed the landscape of music and influenced 100s of bands. They alone almost created this whole other cult genre.
Click to expand...
I feel the same way about The Beatles. I'm not a fan of them at all, but you can't deny that they are the biggest band of all time.
 
BVS said:
I would. I'm not a Rush fan, but I'm well aware of how they changed the landscape of music and influenced 100s of bands. They alone almost created this whole other cult genre.

But I think you're right, we must be talking about two different things, because I'm not sure how you can't see Rush's change to the musical landscape but somehow say that Rage did... I find that perplexing.
Click to expand...

Ironically, I am a Rush fan, but disagree. I think they have been influential to a certain degree, but no where near the degree I'm talking about. I'm not sure whether I'd say they're more or less influential than U2, I'd have to give that some thought (they're certainly more talented musicians individually than any member of U2).

Again, I'm not saying U2 isn't influential...all big bands are influential to some extent. But U2 hasn't completely changed the game or musical landscape in a dramatic way.

So I think we're talking about different things, and since it all boils down to opinion anyway, there's no "right" answer, no point in pursuing it.
 
LUNEDEMINUIT said:
I agree for MOS.But guess what happen when they began to play it at the end of the show? fans starts to run to the exit.
Click to expand...

True as I was one but that was to beat the NY traffic. However, it seemed to hold it's own live (no classic but no dud).
 
Galeongirl said:
Yes, that's totally because of MOS. Not because it is the closing song and people want to beat traffic. Like they did with 40 or whatever ending song on the Vertigo tour. Or with Walk On during Elevation.

Do you enjoy these fallacies? Because you keep making them.
Click to expand...

LOL.....I replied that I left too to beat traffic before reading what you wrote...guess I wasn't the only one. However, if they ended with 40, I would have stayed. think you lose your U2 membership if you leave before 40 ;)
 
I will never argue that U2 as musicians are on par with any number of other members of other rock bands. They aren't. So if you want to argue that radiohead can play their instruments better? :shrug: ya got me.

U2 have always been greater than the sum of their parts. Eno and Lanios certainly have a lot to due with the band shaping their sound and getting out of being pigeonholed into any one genre or style.

They want to be big. They've never argued that. Their biggest fear was becoming some washed up lounge act struggling in vegas to pay the bills.

Acts like radiohead and pearl jam made a clear, conscious decision to pull themselves out if the mainstream. They were also bands from the 90s, right after Kurt, in an ever changing social climate that cloud eat someone alive if they weren't ready for it.

So radiohead may be more influential amongst music junkies and insiders and more artsy types... and you're probably right. And they're probably better at playing their instruments. But because of the conscious decision in direction that they themselves decided to take, they aren't even in the same stratosphere that U2 are in when it comes to global reach and influence over a massive audience.

Many bands go the route u2 have gone. You can count the ones who's success can rival that of u2 on one hand. And they all have one thing in common. They've all been pretty damned good for a pretty damned long time. And even then, nobody has had the length that u2 have.

So if that's not greatness to you, then there's no reason to further continue this conversations because we clearly have differing opinions on the definition of the word.
 
LemonMelon said:
I have no idea what a dance beat album is, but Fat of the Land was definitely a big deal. I don't know what it influenced, per se...the Prodigy weren't trend-setters, but a lot of people heard it and it increased the commercial force of the genre.
Click to expand...

Unquestionably big album. But not the statement he made.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

prbiker15
U2:UV Boxscore Discussion
Replies
20
Views
1K
DeVaul
DeVaul
D
Looking for the best storyteller of U2 - Garage to Stadius
Replies
0
Views
102
Dave A
D
W
A Boy Falls From the Sky is some U2's best work
Replies
3
Views
2K
zoocarolina
Z
cobl04
Kiss the Future documentary
Replies
11
Views
3K
MrsSpringsteen
MrsSpringsteen
P
The Band That Saved My Life - Paulo Vetri's project
Replies
4
Views
2K
Paulo Vetri
P

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom