Topic: two best bands (Read 6749 times)

somedude210 · « **on:** July 24, 2005, 01:33:40 PM »

i think that there are two bands in the world that can be considered great. the beatles for innovating rock and redefining a generation, and U2 (please don't kill me beatles fans) because they are a band that you can listen to and they have a meaning in the world. Beatles did something no other band ever did and there's no denying their greatness (thats like denying that Bush screwed up at least once) but, i think you can put U2 up there as number 2, cause they are also innovators but they helped to change the world. if John was still alive then he would probably agree that U2 has done alot to help the world.

Did I ask too much
More than a lot
You gave me nothing
Now it's all I got
We're one
But we're not the same
Well we
Hurt each other
Then we do it again
You say
Love is a temple
Love a higher law -One, U2

Brynjar · « **Reply #1 on:** July 24, 2005, 06:29:57 PM »

No doubt about U2 being a great band. One of my favourites. But after Achtung Baby, they haven

somedude210 · « **Reply #2 on:** July 24, 2005, 09:13:14 PM »

how bout All that you cant leave behind. i mean Peace on Earth rings tones of Lennon in that. and most of their 90's stuff is terrible, i agree but there's no denying that they are up there with the beatles in what a rock band should be.

Brynjar · « **Reply #3 on:** July 24, 2005, 10:10:11 PM »

Yeah well, Bono is not the only one who

joan was quizzical · « **Reply #4 on:** July 24, 2005, 10:33:19 PM »

I saw them in concert a while back, and I have to say, it was one of the best concerts I've ever been to. I wouldn't consider myself a die-hard fan, but they totally captivated me. I would have to agree though, that their really great work (to me, anyhow) came from a long time ago, and I can't think of many recent songs that really get me.

But... Bono is freakin' hot.

~ missy

somedude210 · « **Reply #5 on:** July 24, 2005, 11:04:57 PM »

i saw the concert in boston on the Elevation tour and that was something that you really couldnt descrive. i mean it was more protesty and live8ish then just there for the music.

if anyone ever wonders why they are considered protesty and stuff, might i recommend these songs which probably amounts to as much as lennon did:

Sunday Bloody Sunday
Where The Streets have no name
Peace on Earth
One
Miracle Drug
Love and Peace or Else
New Years Day
God Part 2
Miss Sarajevo
One Step Closer
Pride (in the name of love)

and those are just the well known ones

somedude210 · « **Reply #6 on:** July 24, 2005, 11:06:11 PM »

but any album that wasnt from the 90's, its good and are their true sound. then again the beatles did experiment alot with sound so maybe the 90's were just the WA of U2...that lasted 10 years

number14 · « **Reply #7 on:** July 24, 2005, 11:20:41 PM »

u 2 is alright

mclen57 · « **Reply #8 on:** July 24, 2005, 11:35:30 PM »

Certainly one of the best bands of the 80s. Unfortunately that's not really saying much. To me the 80s was just nothing but a 10 year Pop Fest. Even the most ground-breaking and innovative artists of the 60s and 70s were just simply selling out.
I look at rock's most creative years to be 65-75 starting with Rubber Soul and Pet Sounds moving right along with the progressive sounds in the 70s with the likes of King Crimson, Yes and Genesis and of course other new sounds like Allman Bros and Southern Rock. After '75 everything more or less just flatlined. Then we had that musical accident called "disco" and thank God that didn't last. And then we come to punk and new wave where simplicity ruled which was not necessarily a bad thing. Some of it was actually a breath of fresh air after all the over-indulgence that had been going on before.
U2 came in at this period and managed to bring the most out of this minimalistic style. To this day, they're still more or less stuck in the 3 chord blues progression where the Beatles went way beyond that. All in all though, they still hold up well.

number14 · « **Reply #9 on:** July 24, 2005, 11:48:05 PM »

ive never have really gotten into the 80's

joan was quizzical · « **Reply #10 on:** July 25, 2005, 01:47:18 AM »

Quote from: somedude210

... maybe the 90's were just the WA of U2...that lasted 10 years

Yes. Except that the White Album is great, and 90s U2 is not great. So, no.

~ missy

Bobber · « **Reply #11 on:** July 25, 2005, 08:34:00 AM »

I think U2 is (still) great. Went to a live concert in Amsterdam, just a few weeks ago. Besides the terrible sound (due to the stadium), it was great to be there. U2 played almost all their great hits and songs from their new cd. It was a pity Bono had to preach such a lot. Five or six times he tried to chance the world with words that nobody could properly listen to. As said, their ninety's stuff doesn't really touch me. Listening to Pop was an equal disappointment as listening to Radiohead's Kid A.

An Apple Beatle · « **Reply #12 on:** July 25, 2005, 12:08:59 PM »

Joshua Tree is my fave album from these guys. They are an amazing stadium band. Not many (If any) can match their prolific reportoire.

To say they are in the top 2 second only to The Beatles?.......There must a few other bands to at least consider.
Although not a BIG fan myself, Queen would have to be up there in contention. I can't think of anything else in terms of global domination.

Bobber · « **Reply #13 on:** July 25, 2005, 12:22:11 PM »

Quote from: An_Apple_Beatle

There must a few other bands to at least consider.
Although not a BIG fan myself, Queen would have to be up there in contention. I can't think of anything else in terms of global domination.

I know Bob Marley is very well known across the world.

An Apple Beatle · « **Reply #14 on:** July 25, 2005, 12:29:35 PM »

^Good point.

somedude210 · « **Reply #15 on:** July 25, 2005, 10:01:58 PM »

Quote from: joan_was_quizzical

Yes. Except that the White Album is great, and 90s U2 is not great. So, no.

~ missy

but White album may be great, but its also considered one of the worse albums of the later beatles. im sorry its not that great. since rubber soul, that has got to be the crappiest album they did. remember im not including their early stuff cause they really didnt innovate or restore rock. U2 is the Irish beatles, though not as great, best dublin has to offer.

somedude210 · « **Reply #16 on:** July 25, 2005, 10:09:32 PM »

ok ok, fine, i myself am a U2 fan and i find that they do for the world, what the beatles did for music. if john had the chance, i wouldnt be surprised if he had offered to join them in protest or something. and to make it clear. U2 is not an 80's band since they started in the mid 70's. so they are a band that lasted 4 decades and sucked for one.

Mairi · « **Reply #17 on:** July 25, 2005, 10:11:14 PM »

Oh, but their earlier albums DID innovate rock. The lyrics may not have been special in every one of them, (She Loves You, yeah, yeah, etc) but they had some great bass playing from Paul and quite a few memorable guitar riffs.
Don't forget Yesterday, their most famous song, came out in 1965.

p8ntball370 · « **Reply #18 on:** July 25, 2005, 10:47:22 PM »

Not to be mean, but somedude could you please use some capatalization in your sentences, even though I just spelled that wrong. (Most Likely). Second off, I dont understand what U2 has done for the world? I'm sure there is stuff I dont know about, such as this. So, could you please explain what U2 has done to significantly better the world?

somedude210 · « **Reply #19 on:** July 26, 2005, 12:13:57 AM »

first, i'm too lazy to use any grammer. secondly, Bono has created the organization One, which has helped out the poverty problem in Africa, and he has attended meetings with world leaders to push for world peace and alternatives then war. he has also helped rally support against the IRA attacks in Ireland. and i mean, hes rich. he can help just about anyway with the amount of money he has.

News:

Author Topic: two best bands (Read 6749 times)

Bobber

Bobber