Author Topic: U2 vs Radiohead  (Read 25050 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Shark Ericson

  • Refugee
  • *
  • Posts: 268
Re: U2 vs Radiohead
« Reply #90 on: December 03, 2012, 07:27:49 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
And a resident angry old man.

Do we have an angry middle-aged men/ kind-of-old men? Like Walter White from Breaking Bad?

Offline imedi

  • Child of Grace
  • **
  • Posts: 1,562
Re: U2 vs Radiohead
« Reply #91 on: December 04, 2012, 11:40:07 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
being successful in the mainstream is the ultimate proof of how great your music is

Yes. One Direction's new album (which sold 1 million copies worldwide in its first week) was the apex of music greatness in 2012

 ;)

thank you for pointin this out. his argument is straight Jickian logic. makes me vomit a lil in my mouth thinking sales=talent.

x2. There are a few pushing this train of thought, I'd love for one of you to explain it to me.
no no you have missed the point i was trying to make.. yes one direction have sold a million albums and good luck to them..what i was saying was some people on here were making the point that radiohead were not interested in the mainstream. surely every band wants to sell as much of their music as they can if not for money then so as many people as possible will hear their music. i dont think for 1 second that radiohead would not love to sell as many albums as u2 and play to as many people as u2

Offline Bads316

  • Elevated
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,221
  • Ain't nothin' but a muffin
Re: U2 vs Radiohead
« Reply #92 on: December 04, 2012, 12:05:09 PM »
That's a fair assessment, sorry for misinterpreting. Of course they would love to, but there's no doubt that it's art before commerce as far as Radiohead are concerned (and that's no reason for them or their fans to look down their noses at anyone; Twilight soundtrack anyone?) they would love U2 figures but without compromise. If Kid A had sold 25 million then I'm sure they'd be delighted, but it wasn't a record designed to do that, it was first and foremost a record they wanted to make based on what they were inspired by and listening to at that time, I say kudos for that because their stock was sky high at the tail-end of the 90's and they easily could of put out another guitar based record out that may very well of put them in the big leagues. 
 
Being successful in the mainstream isn't proof of anything other than you were in the right place at the right time. 
« Last Edit: December 04, 2012, 12:07:19 PM by Bads316 »

Offline bethere

  • Running to Stand Still
  • **
  • Posts: 1,182
Re: U2 vs Radiohead
« Reply #93 on: December 04, 2012, 01:55:25 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
 
 
Being successful in the mainstream isn't proof of anything other than you were in the right place at the right time.

            Being loved by music critics and the Indy nerds is not proof of anything either.

Offline Bads316

  • Elevated
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,221
  • Ain't nothin' but a muffin
Re: U2 vs Radiohead
« Reply #94 on: December 04, 2012, 02:00:34 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
 
 
Being successful in the mainstream isn't proof of anything other than you were in the right place at the right time.

            Being loved by music critics and the Indy nerds is not proof of anything either.

Didn't say it was.

Offline boom boom

  • Running to Stand Still
  • **
  • Posts: 1,195
Re: U2 vs Radiohead
« Reply #95 on: December 04, 2012, 05:08:33 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Well, Radiohead is the messiah of the nerdy indy lovers. They are certainly better than Justin Bieber, Britney Spears, Katy Perry, Fun, LMFAO, Adele, etc., but they are not nearly as good as U2 and they probably don't deserve such a comparison at all. They will always be worshiped and loved in the small bubble of indy world, but outside that bubble most people couldn't tell you anything the band sings except maybe Creep which after nearly 20 years continues to be their most recognized, and for most people, only known song in the United States.

I agree 100%.

I have no issue with Radiohead fans liking U2. It is only natural to like U2, after all they are the best in their craft up to this day.

What puzzles me are U2 fans who gravitate towards Radiohead because U2 are not "alternative" enough or have become "sellouts."  U2 were never designed to be an alternative band, except for Zooropa which they purposely made that way and won a Grammy for it.  For all of their career, U2 are a mainstream pop/rock band.  Some just cannot accept this reality.

Cheers,

J

I also couldn't agree more.  U2 have never pretended to be anything than who they are.  In fact Bono once said in an interview,  U2 are a big band that make big music for big places.  That's just what we do.  With this in mind, I think they have over the course of their 32 year career have done an excellent job at balancing trying to maintain artistic credibility and critical acclaim and at the same time being a big band in the mainstream. In fact that's what attracted me to U2 in the first place.  The determination to be a big band.  I remember watching an interview with Bono and Adam around 1980/81. They were being interviewed at a downtown coffee shop by city tv in Toronto I think.  I remember Bono sipping his coffee and then saying, I think U2 are destined to be the biggest band in the world, up there with the stones and the who, and if you haven't heard of us yet, I gaurantee you will.  From that point I was hooked. 

Offline AJ

  • Elevated
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,098
  • Vinyl Guru
Re: U2 vs Radiohead
« Reply #96 on: December 04, 2012, 05:28:39 PM »
Atoms for Peace AMOK Lp is up for preorder on their site

Offline jick

  • Precious Stone
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,754
Re: U2 vs Radiohead
« Reply #97 on: December 04, 2012, 06:46:12 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I also couldn't agree more.  U2 have never pretended to be anything than who they are.  In fact Bono once said in an interview,  U2 are a big band that make big music for big places.  That's just what we do.  With this in mind, I think they have over the course of their 32 year career have done an excellent job at balancing trying to maintain artistic credibility and critical acclaim and at the same time being a big band in the mainstream. In fact that's what attracted me to U2 in the first place.  The determination to be a big band.  I remember watching an interview with Bono and Adam around 1980/81. They were being interviewed at a downtown coffee shop by city tv in Toronto I think.  I remember Bono sipping his coffee and then saying, I think U2 are destined to be the biggest band in the world, up there with the stones and the who, and if you haven't heard of us yet, I gaurantee you will.  From that point I was hooked.

Radiohead never made any pretenses or declarations of ambitions to be the "best band in the world."

Surely they know with their limited skill set that they don't have it in them to aim that high.  I will give them credit for that.

Which begs the question: why does this thread even exist?

Cheers,

J

An Cat Dubh

  • Guest
Re: U2 vs Radiohead
« Reply #98 on: December 04, 2012, 09:38:39 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I also couldn't agree more.  U2 have never pretended to be anything than who they are.  In fact Bono once said in an interview,  U2 are a big band that make big music for big places.  That's just what we do.  With this in mind, I think they have over the course of their 32 year career have done an excellent job at balancing trying to maintain artistic credibility and critical acclaim and at the same time being a big band in the mainstream. In fact that's what attracted me to U2 in the first place.  The determination to be a big band.  I remember watching an interview with Bono and Adam around 1980/81. They were being interviewed at a downtown coffee shop by city tv in Toronto I think.  I remember Bono sipping his coffee and then saying, I think U2 are destined to be the biggest band in the world, up there with the stones and the who, and if you haven't heard of us yet, I gaurantee you will.  From that point I was hooked.

Radiohead never made any pretenses or declarations of ambitions to be the "best band in the world."

Surely they know with their limited skill set that they don't have it in them to aim that high.  I will give them credit for that.

Which begs the question: why does this thread even exist?

Cheers,

J


As musicians Jick, Radiohead are infinitely better than U2. U2 will even tell you that. I have actually had a conversation with Bono and The Edge about Jonny Greenwood and Thom Yorke and they had nothing but admiration for them. Its a different type of music, they want different things and go about it in totally different ways. You may hate Radiohead, but you can not say they are not good musicians.

They are a lot more humble. They do not need all the admiration and world popularity that Bono wants. They are a like 5 Larry Mullens actually.

Offline jick

  • Precious Stone
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,754
Re: U2 vs Radiohead
« Reply #99 on: December 04, 2012, 10:43:58 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I also couldn't agree more.  U2 have never pretended to be anything than who they are.  In fact Bono once said in an interview,  U2 are a big band that make big music for big places.  That's just what we do.  With this in mind, I think they have over the course of their 32 year career have done an excellent job at balancing trying to maintain artistic credibility and critical acclaim and at the same time being a big band in the mainstream. In fact that's what attracted me to U2 in the first place.  The determination to be a big band.  I remember watching an interview with Bono and Adam around 1980/81. They were being interviewed at a downtown coffee shop by city tv in Toronto I think.  I remember Bono sipping his coffee and then saying, I think U2 are destined to be the biggest band in the world, up there with the stones and the who, and if you haven't heard of us yet, I gaurantee you will.  From that point I was hooked.

Radiohead never made any pretenses or declarations of ambitions to be the "best band in the world."

Surely they know with their limited skill set that they don't have it in them to aim that high.  I will give them credit for that.

Which begs the question: why does this thread even exist?

Cheers,

J


As musicians Jick, Radiohead are infinitely better than U2. U2 will even tell you that. I have actually had a conversation with Bono and The Edge about Jonny Greenwood and Thom Yorke and they had nothing but admiration for them. Its a different type of music, they want different things and go about it in totally different ways. You may hate Radiohead, but you can not say they are not good musicians.

They are a lot more humble. They do not need all the admiration and world popularity that Bono wants. They are a like 5 Larry Mullens actually.

They may be better "musicians" but that is not what I mean by "limited skill set."  The set should contain everything, and not just music. It includes an instinct to know what the public wants, charisma to win over the crowd, articulate prowess for interviews, willingness to promote their albums in mainstream media, hyperbole in hyping up new releases - those are the kinds of skill sets U2 has that Radiohead doesn't.

This is not about musicianship.  Otherwise, I can just walk to the local bar here in my city and find some cover band who can play the guitar faster with more finger acrobatics than The Edge.  That is all beside the point.  The point is that this thread is pointless.

You can't compare apples and oranges.  But in this case, its more like apples against grains of sand.

Cheers,

J

Borack

  • Guest
Re: U2 vs Radiohead
« Reply #100 on: December 05, 2012, 12:19:21 AM »
I respect Radiohead but I've also not been able to connect with their music as viscerally or as effortlessly as I can with a lot of U2 music. That said, TY and the folks do seem refreshingly original AND if I had to be banished to some island with only a few CD's, I'd probably bring along 1 Radiohead album for each 2 by U2. I'll keep trying, but I did like some of RH's earlier stuff like Fake Plastic Trees.

Offline imedi

  • Child of Grace
  • **
  • Posts: 1,562
Re: U2 vs Radiohead
« Reply #101 on: December 05, 2012, 08:56:08 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I also couldn't agree more.  U2 have never pretended to be anything than who they are.  In fact Bono once said in an interview,  U2 are a big band that make big music for big places.  That's just what we do.  With this in mind, I think they have over the course of their 32 year career have done an excellent job at balancing trying to maintain artistic credibility and critical acclaim and at the same time being a big band in the mainstream. In fact that's what attracted me to U2 in the first place.  The determination to be a big band.  I remember watching an interview with Bono and Adam around 1980/81. They were being interviewed at a downtown coffee shop by city tv in Toronto I think.  I remember Bono sipping his coffee and then saying, I think U2 are destined to be the biggest band in the world, up there with the stones and the who, and if you haven't heard of us yet, I gaurantee you will.  From that point I was hooked.

Radiohead never made any pretenses or declarations of ambitions to be the "best band in the world."

Surely they know with their limited skill set that they don't have it in them to aim that high.  I will give them credit for that.

Which begs the question: why does this thread even exist?

Cheers,

J


As musicians Jick, Radiohead are infinitely better than U2. U2 will even tell you that. I have actually had a conversation with Bono and The Edge about Jonny Greenwood and Thom Yorke and they had nothing but admiration for them. Its a different type of music, they want different things and go about it in totally different ways. You may hate Radiohead, but you can not say they are not good musicians.

They are a lot more humble. They do not need all the admiration and world popularity that Bono wants. They are a like 5 Larry Mullens actually.
AS MUSICIANS RADIOHEAD ARE INFINITELY BETTER THAN U2!!!!!!! EVEN U2 WILL TELL YOU THAT ROFL..... you better go on youtube and see what bono says about the edge guitar playing.. think the interview is called OFF THE RECORD.. i think you will find that nevermind j greenwood bono likes to compare edge with j hendrix lol.. i love radiohead!! to me they have different styles its like one person like oranges someone else prefers apples if i had a choice who i wanted to listen to then it would be edges guitar that does not make my opinion any better or worse and does not mean greenwood is any less of a guitar player just different . so i agree with most of what you said apart from the first part
« Last Edit: December 05, 2012, 08:58:20 AM by imedi »

Offline Tumbling Dice

  • Drowning Man/Woman
  • ***
  • Posts: 22,131
  • I won't pay the usual fee
Re: U2 vs Radiohead
« Reply #102 on: December 05, 2012, 08:58:52 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I also couldn't agree more.  U2 have never pretended to be anything than who they are.  In fact Bono once said in an interview,  U2 are a big band that make big music for big places.  That's just what we do.  With this in mind, I think they have over the course of their 32 year career have done an excellent job at balancing trying to maintain artistic credibility and critical acclaim and at the same time being a big band in the mainstream. In fact that's what attracted me to U2 in the first place.  The determination to be a big band.  I remember watching an interview with Bono and Adam around 1980/81. They were being interviewed at a downtown coffee shop by city tv in Toronto I think.  I remember Bono sipping his coffee and then saying, I think U2 are destined to be the biggest band in the world, up there with the stones and the who, and if you haven't heard of us yet, I gaurantee you will.  From that point I was hooked.

Radiohead never made any pretenses or declarations of ambitions to be the "best band in the world."

Surely they know with their limited skill set that they don't have it in them to aim that high.  I will give them credit for that.

Which begs the question: why does this thread even exist?

Cheers,

J


As musicians Jick, Radiohead are infinitely better than U2. U2 will even tell you that. I have actually had a conversation with Bono and The Edge about Jonny Greenwood and Thom Yorke and they had nothing but admiration for them. Its a different type of music, they want different things and go about it in totally different ways. You may hate Radiohead, but you can not say they are not good musicians.

They are a lot more humble. They do not need all the admiration and world popularity that Bono wants. They are a like 5 Larry Mullens actually.
AS MUSICIANS RADIOHEAD ARE INFINITELY BETTER THAN U2!!!!!!! EVEN U2 WILL TELL YOU THAT ROFL..... you better go on youtube and see what bono says about the edge guitar playing.. think the interview is called OFF THE RECORD.. i think you will find that nevermind j greenwood bono likes to compare edge with j hendrix lol.. i love radiohead!! to me they have different styles its like one person like oranges someone else prefers apples if i had a choice who i wanted to listen to then it would be edges guitar that does not make my opinion any better or worse and does not mean greenwood is any less of a guitar player just different

What's the skill levels of different band's musicians got to do with anything?

 

Offline AJ

  • Elevated
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,098
  • Vinyl Guru
Re: U2 vs Radiohead
« Reply #103 on: December 05, 2012, 04:33:43 PM »
On Atoms for Peace (thom yorke band) homepage if you click on the clocktower you see if you scroll right there is a free download

Offline bethere

  • Running to Stand Still
  • **
  • Posts: 1,182
Re: U2 vs Radiohead
« Reply #104 on: December 06, 2012, 05:14:14 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I also couldn't agree more.  U2 have never pretended to be anything than who they are.  In fact Bono once said in an interview,  U2 are a big band that make big music for big places.  That's just what we do.  With this in mind, I think they have over the course of their 32 year career have done an excellent job at balancing trying to maintain artistic credibility and critical acclaim and at the same time being a big band in the mainstream. In fact that's what attracted me to U2 in the first place.  The determination to be a big band.  I remember watching an interview with Bono and Adam around 1980/81. They were being interviewed at a downtown coffee shop by city tv in Toronto I think.  I remember Bono sipping his coffee and then saying, I think U2 are destined to be the biggest band in the world, up there with the stones and the who, and if you haven't heard of us yet, I gaurantee you will.  From that point I was hooked.

Radiohead never made any pretenses or declarations of ambitions to be the "best band in the world."

Surely they know with their limited skill set that they don't have it in them to aim that high.  I will give them credit for that.

Which begs the question: why does this thread even exist?

Cheers,

J


As musicians Jick, Radiohead are infinitely better than U2. U2 will even tell you that. I have actually had a conversation with Bono and The Edge about Jonny Greenwood and Thom Yorke and they had nothing but admiration for them. Its a different type of music, they want different things and go about it in totally different ways. You may hate Radiohead, but you can not say they are not good musicians.

They are a lot more humble. They do not need all the admiration and world popularity that Bono wants. They are a like 5 Larry Mullens actually.
AS MUSICIANS RADIOHEAD ARE INFINITELY BETTER THAN U2!!!!!!! EVEN U2 WILL TELL YOU THAT ROFL..... you better go on youtube and see what bono says about the edge guitar playing.. think the interview is called OFF THE RECORD.. i think you will find that nevermind j greenwood bono likes to compare edge with j hendrix lol.. i love radiohead!! to me they have different styles its like one person like oranges someone else prefers apples if i had a choice who i wanted to listen to then it would be edges guitar that does not make my opinion any better or worse and does not mean greenwood is any less of a guitar player just different . so i agree with most of what you said apart from the first part

          Radiohead is not infinitely better than anyone.