2005: U2-mania

[vansmack]

Originally posted by Venerable Bede:
 awww, your  slacking

No sound card on the office machine.  I knew it was there, but I can't listen to it until I get home, which is extremely painful.

[lily1]

i plan on spending my entire work bonus on seeing u2 repeatedly on tour. i LOVE them, damnit. always have. always will. and here's to them playing on my birthday in april. how excited i would be! now if they would just do a date at redrocks sometime this year. i've always wanted to see them at redrocks.

[Arthwys]

Since I don't pay attention to mtv, i've been checking out the album from nme.com, they've had it up since 7 am EST.

[Fico]

Live u2 performance..
 
 http://www.thegoalissoul.cjb.net/

[flawd101]

i guess i am the minority in the tought that their new single is annoying.  almost as bad as an old navy comericial...

[Charlie Nakatestes, Japanese Golfer]

U2 is so 1987. Geesh, you people are old.

[chaz]

I'll be honest.  I'm fairly indifferent about just about anything U2's put out since Unforgettable Fire, perhaps Joshua Tree.  It's just never been very high on the radar for me since the mid 80's.  But, I love the first 4 or 5 records they put out, and seeing them in 85 made me realize the power of rock (this was well before flawd was even born!!).  It was definately a defining moment in my life.
 
 But flawd I'm with ya.  If I was a youg whipper snapper such as yourself I'd probably hate them.  Or maybe not, who knows.
 
 Anyway, I think I'll try to snag some tix for this tour when they are available.  Partly out of nostalgia (I'm sure I'll have a blast) and partly as a surprise to my wife, who last saw them on the Joshua Tree tour.

[Charlie Nakatestes, Japanese Golfer]

I'm with you on not caring for anything after Joshua Tree. I liked them through that era.
 
 But going back and listening to that old stuff now is tough for me. Bands like the Stones, Beatles, and Clash sound like so classic and timeless that they can be appreciated forever. U2 just sounds dated and irrelevant.
 
 

Originally posted by chaz:
  I'll be honest.  I'm fairly indifferent about just about anything U2's put out since Unforgettable Fire, perhaps Joshua Tree.  It's just never been very high on the radar for me since the mid 80's.  But, I love the first 4 or 5 records they put out, and seeing them in 85 made me realize the power of rock (this was well before flawd was even born!!).  It was definately a defining moment in my life.
 
 But flawd I'm with ya.  If I was a youg whipper snapper such as yourself I'd probably hate them.  Or maybe not, who knows.

[chaz]

I still like the old stuff.  Do I listen to it?  Rarely.  Less than i listen to the beatles?  Yes.
 
 But the Beatles last album came out the year I was born, and I snatched up some of those early U2 albums the week they came out...so somehow it's different for me.
 
 

Originally posted by Rhett Miller:
  I'm with you on not caring for anything after Joshua Tree. I liked them through that era.
 
 But going back and listening to that old stuff now is tough for me. Bands like the Stones, Beatles, and Clash sound like so classic and timeless that they can be appreciated forever. U2 just sounds dated and irrelevant.
 
   

Originally posted by chaz:
  I'll be honest.  I'm fairly indifferent about just about anything U2's put out since Unforgettable Fire, perhaps Joshua Tree.  It's just never been very high on the radar for me since the mid 80's.  But, I love the first 4 or 5 records they put out, and seeing them in 85 made me realize the power of rock (this was well before flawd was even born!!).  It was definately a defining moment in my life.
 
 But flawd I'm with ya.  If I was a youg whipper snapper such as yourself I'd probably hate them.  Or maybe not, who knows.

[/b]

[Charlie Nakatestes, Japanese Golfer]

I snapped up the debut albums by Smashing Pumpkins and Nine Inch Nails the first week they released. They haven't stood the test of time for me either.

[twelsh737]

The problem with comparing the U2 or NIN's debut album to early Beatles is the record industry was dominated by 45 rpm singles in the early days of rock. So saying that all of "Boy" doesn't stand up to the single for "I want to hold your hand" is not really acurate. Can you even say what the b-side was? The Beatles didn't even get cool before they started smoking pot.
 Songs like "Electric Co." or "New Years Day" stand the test of time and a band shouldn't be faulted for the bad luck of being born post-Beatles. I mean the Beatles were just trying their best to copy Buddy Holly anyway.

[Charlie Nakatestes, Japanese Golfer]

To be honest, I don't really listen to the Beatles much.
 
 But I can compare them to the Stones. I don't listen to Stones 45's, I listen to the likes of  Beggars Banquet, Let it Bleed, and Sticky Fingers, and can say that those stand the test of time for me much better than any U2 or NIN album.
 
 

Originally posted by tbmtt:
  The problem with comparing the U2 or NIN's debut album to early Beatles is the record industry was dominated by 45 rpm singles in the early days of rock. So saying that all of "Boy" doesn't stand up to the single for "I want to hold your hand" is not really acurate. Can you even say what the b-side was? The Beatles didn't even get cool before they started smoking pot.
 Songs like "Electric Co." or "New Years Day" stand the test of time and a band shouldn't be faulted for the bad luck of being born post-Beatles. I mean the Beatles were just trying their best to copy Buddy Holly anyway.

[chaz]

Originally posted by Rhett Miller:
  I snapped up the debut albums by Smashing Pumpkins and Nine Inch Nails the first week they released. They haven't stood the test of time for me either.

Oh forget it.

[Jaguär]

Never cared much for U2 back in the 80s and care much, much less about them now. Have no desire to have anything to do with them now other than to avoid them.
 
 But have to admit the song on the iPod commercial isn't as annoying as most of the crap they've put out in a very long time.
 
 Bono for Anti-Christ!

[Guiny]

Originally posted by tbmtt:
 I mean the Beatles were just trying their best to copy Buddy Holly anyway. [/QB]

That's a great line....LOL