“U2 ARE now very close to irrelevance” - Bono to Irish Times, Sept 10, 2011

[mdmomof7]

POP sure seems to have cast a loooong shadow over the last decade for the band. It's like they've spent the last decade trying more to NOT be that band than trying to be something different.

I love THAT band! 

[dysthanasiac]

Sure. All major bands have crafted public images. And unlike Radiohead content sticking in their own niche...I don't think U2 has a niche, unless it's "we don't have a niche because we want to be no.1".

I mean no offense when I ask this, but are you sure you know what niche means?  Because you don't seem to be applying the term correctly at all. 

Like I said, I sincerely mean no offense.  I'm just trying to find some common ground for the purposes of the discussion.

[soapit]

seems like the correct usage to me.

niche   .....
3. a distinct segment of a market.

[dysthanasiac]

Indeed.  And which distinct segment of the music market is Radiohead serving? 

And likewise for U2?

EDIT: Is that a plate of baby hands?

[soapit]

the "alternate segment" for lack of a better word. not really up with the names of genres these days.

its a plate of baby hand soaps.

[dysthanasiac]

the "alternate segment" for lack of a better word. not really up with the names of genres these days.

I, too, know f*** all about genre classifications.  Zooropa won Best Alternative Album in 1993(4?) over the likes of Pearl Jam, Smashing Pumpkins, Soundgarden, etc., so I'm not quite sure genre means anything anymore.

I guess I just can't see calling Radiohead a niche band if the same logic doesn't then apply to U2, who, for all intents and purposes, are turning into the Rolling Stones.  That band will fill stadiums until they decide to stop filling stadiums.  But, I couldn't tell you the names of any of their records since the early '90s, because they simply do not matter at all.

Their niche is nostalgia, and U2 is rapidly closing in on that themselves.  If Radiohead has a niche, it's originality, and that's really stretching the definition of the word.

[Kurukira]

POP sure seems to have cast a loooong shadow over the last decade for the band. It's like they've spent the last decade trying more to NOT be that band than trying to be something different.

I love THAT band! 

Me too...

[xy]

seems like the correct usage to me.

niche   .....
3. a distinct segment of a market.

If you can't see Radiohead's niche, that's too bad.

[Tumbling Dice]

I guess I just can't see calling Radiohead a niche band if the same logic doesn't then apply to U2, who, for all intents and purposes, are turning into the Rolling Stones.  That band will fill stadiums until they decide to stop filling stadiums.  But, I couldn't tell you the names of any of their records since the early '90s, because they simply do not matter at all.

Their niche is nostalgia, and U2 is rapidly closing in on that themselves.

What are you talking about: U2 are "turning into the Rolling Stones"?  They have already become just like the modern Rolling Stones.  In fact, on their last tour, U2 outstoned the Stones.

[Sugarcube]

seems like the correct usage to me.

niche   .....
3. a distinct segment of a market.

If you can't see Radiohead's niche, that's too bad.

Yes Radiohead. Niche U2 yes. No Stones Rolling

[Tumbling Dice]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JywK_5bT8z0

[mattressjedi]

Hey there's nothing too wrong with the Stones. Except they're more sitting than rolling these days.

[dysthanasiac]

What are you talking about: U2 are "turning into the Rolling Stones"?  They have already become just like the modern Rolling Stones.  In fact, on their last tour, U2 outstoned the Stones.

Fair enough.  That's not a compliment, though.

A Rolling Stones concert is a museum; they're trading on their legacy and nothing more.  I didn't think U2 is quite there yet, but if you say so.

If you can't see Radiohead's niche, that's too bad.

If I can't see it, educate me.  What's is Radiohead's niche?

[Tumbling Dice]

What are you talking about: U2 are "turning into the Rolling Stones"?  They have already become just like the modern Rolling Stones.  In fact, on their last tour, U2 outstoned the Stones.

Fair enough.  That's not a compliment, though.

A Rolling Stones concert is a museum; they're trading on their legacy and nothing more.  I didn't think U2 is quite there yet, but if you say so.

Well the Stones did start their last tour playing 4 new songs from their latest album, but clearly they are trading on their legacy, as are U2.  As are all artists who are more than 20 years in the business.  As was Sting last night in Manchester.

[xy]

The last U2 album people cared about is 8 years old. The last Stones album people cared about was...25 years ago.

If U2 continues the trend of borrowing off their past on their records, then maybe. But given their track record of change being the only constant, I'd give them the benefit of the doubt.