Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

pumajet0

Top 5 rock music artists

Recommended Posts

rocker1992 wrote:

U2 is definatley one of the greatest rock bands of all time but, are songs like Satisfaction, I Can't Explain, Stairway to Heaven, etc. really easily forgettable. Those bands are legends and even U2 would tell you that...

I'm not saying THOSE songs are forgettable - what I'm saying is that when those bands go up against U2, song for song, by the time you get to thefifth, tenth, fifteenth, twentieth song you will be putting up GREAT U2 songs against TOTAL mediocrity at that point!

 

FACT!

 

laugh.gif

 

tongue.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sad eyes wrote:

basher1 wrote:

ceallach67 wrote:

basher1 wrote:

sad eyes wrote:

You're joking right? Foo Fighters? The Proclaimers? In a list that DOESN'T include U2?

 

Too each his own I guess.

 

image

 

 

1) HANDS DOWN, U2

 

2) The Cure

 

3) The Smiths

 

4) New Order

 

5) Big Audio Dynamite

no not kidding the proclaimers are a great scottish act........and the foo fighters are a great live band.......

 

yeah i may be a subscriber to u2.com and have many u2 related cd's lp's etc etc but u2 are not the best band in the world in my opinion....they do some good stuff yeah but there is better out there.

 

 

I'm ever amazed at how folks think it's okay to call someone out because they don't express the opinon they think they should.
yeah just because i don't include u2 in my top 5 i'm suddenly the devil incarnate i mean come on for fuck sake theres much better out there i just don't happen to be one of those people that thinks when bono farts it should sell a million fucking copies. i find the whole idea of holding this band up as some kind of messiac fucking relic that will save the universe with one song absolutly abhorrantly disgustingly awful and wish that people would just realise that they are just 4 fucking normal human beings who happen to make a decent song once in a fucking while and do not deserve to be placed on a higher than high pedastel.

 

 

 

Well your accusation that I think Bono is the messiah is an absurd extreme exaggeration.

 

However I do think a recording of his flatulence would be far more listenable than some of pap mentioned here for God sake.

 

And I do think they are easily the greatest rock and roll band EVER.

 

It's AT LEAST a no-brainer to put them in EVERY top 5, unless you don't know all their music, have a few screws loose, or have atrocious taste in music!

 

How someone can put a couple of one hit wonders ahead of them boggles my mind.

 

And just a question to those of you that don't think U2 is the greatest band of all time, HONESTLY, do you have AND know their entire music catalog? Can you really and fairly put ANYONE ahead of them if you don't?

 

And for you Stones, Zeppelin and Who fans, care to go song-for-song and see whose songs get weaker and more forgettable first?

 

But to each his own I guess.

 

imageok tell me where exactly did i accuse you that YOU think Bono is the messiah??????.........

 

and i am afraid to tell you I......as in ME.......as in MY OWN PERSONAL OPINION.........do not think that u2 are the greatest rock band ever........there is nosuch thing in MY OPINION.........

 

 

YOU WROTE......

 

"It's AT LEAST a no-brainer to put them in EVERY top 5, unless you don't know all their music, have a few screws loose, or have atrocious taste inmusic!

 

 

i've never read so much pish in my life..........i have all u2's albums i have every song released and quite a number that were not so i like to thinki know the music of u2..........a few screws loose hell yeah i do.....im whats known as "a little c***"..........atrocious taste in music........welli listen to u2 so does that count as atrocious taste in music???????........

 

i am afraid to say that people like you are whats wrong with this website....people like you think that they are the be all and end all of u2 that you and onlyyou understand u2 and the music they put out.....that you and only you have an opinion on u2 and if anyone else does not agree with you then they can fuckoff........im guessing that you are late teens to early 20's and have only recently discovered u2 and it gives you the right to talk bollocks to other folkbecause they disagree with you on this subject...........

 

and whats really fucking with my m,ind is that you have taken offence because Ceallach stated "I know many who would say that anyone who likes U2 hasatrocious taste in music, especially with what they've been putting out lately. It's all a matter of opinion."

 

 

your response......" See I take offense to that, because their new music is EVERY BIT as good as their old music."

 

why take offense ARE YOU BONO IN DISGUISE???????????..........people are entitled to thier opinion it was a free world last time i checked so in closing i willsay this......

 

 

PEOPLE CAN LIKE WHAT THEY WANT AND IF THEY DON'T HAVE U2 IN A TOP 5 OR WHATEVER BIG FAT HAIRY FUCKING DEAL.........DEAL WITH IT AND GET OVER IT.

 

thank you and goodnight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*laugh.gif*laugh.gif*laugh.gif*Grabs the popcorn and eagerly awaits a response*laugh.gif*laugh.gif*laugh.gif*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

popcornsmilie2-1.gifhere ye go Marie ..one each ...........popcornsmilie2-1.gif

 

Think I'll 'keep an eye oan this thread..............Eye.gifroll.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heres a question Sad Eyes ....right SUPPOSING Bono went solo?.....re this is HYPOTHETICAL!.............do you honestly think he has the talent etc to make itas big as this guy?

Now David Bowie is ONE of my Heroes always was since age of 15........so take a wee listen to this man ....tongue.gifok his music is different ..but not so much......there is a lot of Brian Enowith Bowie as well as U2 .......but im just curious as your so defensive of U2 or is it just Bono?......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sad eyes wrote:

ceallach67 wrote:

Sad Eyes... seriously, have you never heard of personal preference? I agree that U2 is certainly one of the best, but there are acts that have come before them that even they would not put themselves ahead of.

 

That's only because they are humble! Deep down inside I think they know that they are at the top of the heap; at least tied with other greats - I think they'd probably get a little chuckle if they read some of the bands that some of you thought were better - then they'd let it roll off like a duck's back!

 

Oh please.
They are at the top of the heap now.
They are not at the top of the heap of all time.
And even they know that those who came before deserve the recognition for their influence on them as for example, they've said without bands like The Clash, there wouldn't be any U2.
Now there are bands today who are crediting U2 in that way… as they should be acknowledged.


ceallach67 wrote:

Regardless, best is not really what we are talking about, what we are talking about is favorite. Just to ask... in your moment of judgment did you ever stop to consider that what you consider one hit wonders, were not one hit wonders in their own country? You do realize that people who post here are from other countries, don't you? And also, mass appeal does not equal good music. Just because something has popular appeal doesn't necessarily mean that musically it is the best.

Alright - I semi-apologize. I'm still laughing at anyone that puts some of the bands that they choose to put in the top 5 whilst not mentioning the greatest rock and roll band of all time!

 

But please, U2 is OFF THE CHARTS good - they deserve every bit of success they have had - popular appeal / musically / THE BEST!

 

I'd go so far as saying there are still MILLIONS that don't know what they are missing - my son being one of them who likes "Death Cab For Cutie" and totally doesn't "hear" / "get" U2.

 

Lead a horse to water yada yada yada!

 

Okay… well… "semi-apologize?" For what?
Your arrogance or your ignorance?
And to reiterate because apparently you're having some difficulty understanding this; the list was to be of people's top 5 FAVORITES,
not what they thought the TOP 5 of ALL TIME was.
I'll tell ya; you'd have to define a time period for that, because of ALL TIME?
Nope, U2 doesn't make the top 5.
Now if you said, currently the top 5 artists, certainly U2 would be there, in my opinion.
Your arrogance is apparent with your statement that "MILLIONS that don't know what they're missing".
Yeah, they do.
They don't like U2… it's really not a crime.
The same could be said by any fan of any other artist as well. All a matter of preference and opinion... remember?

 

 

ceallach67 wrote:

I know many who would say that anyone who likes U2 has atrocious taste in music, especially with what they've been putting out lately. It's all a matter of opinion.

See I take offense to that, because their new music is EVERY BIT as good as their old music.

 

You're taking offense to my opinion?
LOL… whatever blows your dress up.
It's just an opinion, relax. Just because you think your opinion carries importance for others doesn't mean I think mine does, no need to take offense. And no, sorry, none of what is on NLOTH even comes close to the brilliance of their older material.
That comes from both my fan opinion and my musical (as a musician) opinion.
However, it is mostly personal preference opinion based on having been there in the 80's when the older stuff was released and seeing the raw passion and fire they had back then.
Of course, it stands to reason that has a band ages and matures as well as finds huge success, much of that raw hunger and passion will subside because of the conveniences and success afforded them. That's a given.
But… and that's a big BUT… U2, whether it is I like the new stuff or not, should always be credited with never being afraid to reinvent themselves often.
That I respect totally.
I do not have to like the newer material to know and respect that about them.
If you want to mention forgettable… let's talk NLOTH.
Not even two months after its release and it's out of the top 10 already?
That sounds pretty forgettable to me.
Personally, the new album just doesn't make me want to go back to it and listen to it.
Where, take The Unforgettable Fire,
an
album that is 25 years old now,
(God that's hard to believe), and there are times when I just have to put that on and listen to it because I just have to hear it.
Not so much with NLOTH.
But, hey, I know there are people out there where it is that way for them with the new album and that's awesome.
I can't wait to hear those songs live,
because as it is,
U2 is certainly one of the best Live acts ever and often times, after I hear them play a song live, I'm able to appreciate the album version as I didn't before.
U2's music has always and imo, will always catch fire live. Where the passion and fire seems missing on the recording, it never is missing live. Live is far more important than studio. They are an amazing live act; Most definitely one of the best ever.

ceallach67 wrote:

Now... is U2 the biggest act in the world as we speak? Yeah, I'd say so. However, as I said, the biggest doesn't always mean the best. I know many artists that are considered unknown by mass appeal and Top 40 standards where the musicianship makes U2 look like amatuers. But we aren't talking in terms of that here, we are talking about what appeals to you personally... your favorites. That is what the original poster asked.

Really?

 

Who for example?

 

I think U2 are THE BIGGEST BECAUSE they are THE BEST -

 

THUS they have earned biggest and best.

 

image

 

But, you're right - it's a "Whose YOUR favorite?" thread, not a "Who do you think is the best?" thread.

 

I just think it takes nerve to not mention U2 in your top 5 at THEIR fan forum!

 

And it's also worth a real laugh at seeing who some people think are better..."to them"!

 

Whatever. You don't have to like those artists.
Get over it.
Yes, this is a fan forum, people here are fans.
Nowhere did it say that by joining a fan club that you weren't entitled to have other favorite artists.
In my case,
I didn't list U2 in my top 5 because I wanted to be able to list all of my all time favorites and still ended up listing 6.
U2 is definitely one of my top favorite artists of all time.
On any given day they could be the number 1 listened to or they could be not listened to at all.
On any given day, any of the artists I listen to could be my number one favorite. However, what I consider my all time top favorites are so because no matter what I may listen to, I will have always come back to my all time favorites for a listen and likely always will.
That's why they're my all time favorites.

And as far as musicians that are out and around today whose musicianship is better than U2's?
To be fair, that statement should be stricken since truly, I would be listing musicians who don't play rock music.
Because in all honesty, when you're talking the best musicians, you're not going to find them w/in the rock industry.
They generally are found in other genres, say Jazz for example and it would be unfair to compare them.
Likely you wouldn't know them anyhow.
Top Musicianship is not required to write a good selling rock/pop song so the whole thing is irrelevant.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sad eyes wrote:

ceallach67 wrote:

Sad Eyes... seriously, have you never heard of personal preference? I agree that U2 is certainly one of the best, but there are acts that have come before them that even they would not put themselves ahead of.

 

That's only because they are humble! Deep down inside I think they know that they are at the top of the heap; at least tied with other greats - I think they'd probably get a little chuckle if they read some of the bands that some of you thought were better - then they'd let it roll off like a duck's back!

 

Oh please.
They are at the top of the heap now.
They are not at the top of the heap of all time.
And even they know that those who came before deserve the recognition for their influence on them as for example, they've said without bands like The Clash, there wouldn't be any U2.
Now there are bands today who are crediting U2 in that way… as they should be acknowledged.


ceallach67 wrote:

Regardless, best is not really what we are talking about, what we are talking about is favorite. Just to ask... in your moment of judgment did you ever stop to consider that what you consider one hit wonders, were not one hit wonders in their own country? You do realize that people who post here are from other countries, don't you? And also, mass appeal does not equal good music. Just because something has popular appeal doesn't necessarily mean that musically it is the best.

Alright - I semi-apologize. I'm still laughing at anyone that puts some of the bands that they choose to put in the top 5 whilst not mentioning the greatest rock and roll band of all time!

 

But please, U2 is OFF THE CHARTS good - they deserve every bit of success they have had - popular appeal / musically / THE BEST!

 

I'd go so far as saying there are still MILLIONS that don't know what they are missing - my son being one of them who likes "Death Cab For Cutie" and totally doesn't "hear" / "get" U2.

 

Lead a horse to water yada yada yada!

 

Okay… well… "semi-apologize?" For what?
Your arrogance or your ignorance?
And to reiterate because apparently you're having some difficulty understanding this; the list was to be of people's top 5 FAVORITES,
not what they thought the TOP 5 of ALL TIME was.
I'll tell ya; you'd have to define a time period for that, because of ALL TIME?
Nope, U2 doesn't make the top 5.
Now if you said, currently the top 5 artists, certainly U2 would be there, in my opinion.
Your arrogance is apparent with your statement that "MILLIONS that don't know what they're missing".
Yeah, they do.
They don't like U2… it's really not a crime.
The same could be said by any fan of any other artist as well. All a matter of preference and opinion... remember?

 

 

ceallach67 wrote:

I know many who would say that anyone who likes U2 has atrocious taste in music, especially with what they've been putting out lately. It's all a matter of opinion.

See I take offense to that, because their new music is EVERY BIT as good as their old music.

 

You're taking offense to my opinion?
LOL… whatever blows your dress up.
It's just an opinion, relax. Just because you think your opinion carries importance for others doesn't mean I think mine does, no need to take offense. And no, sorry, none of what is on NLOTH even comes close to the brilliance of their older material.
That comes from both my fan opinion and my musical (as a musician) opinion.
However, it is mostly personal preference opinion based on having been there in the 80's when the older stuff was released and seeing the raw passion and fire they had back then.
Of course, it stands to reason that has a band ages and matures as well as finds huge success, much of that raw hunger and passion will subside because of the conveniences and success afforded them. That's a given.
But… and that's a big BUT… U2, whether it is I like the new stuff or not, should always be credited with never being afraid to reinvent themselves often.
That I respect totally.
I do not have to like the newer material to know and respect that about them.
If you want to mention forgettable… let's talk NLOTH.
Not even two months after its release and it's out of the top 10 already?
That sounds pretty forgettable to me.
Personally, the new album just doesn't make me want to go back to it and listen to it.
Where, take The Unforgettable Fire,
an
album that is 25 years old now,
(God that's hard to believe), and there are times when I just have to put that on and listen to it because I just have to hear it.
Not so much with NLOTH.
But, hey, I know there are people out there where it is that way for them with the new album and that's awesome.
I can't wait to hear those songs live,
because as it is,
U2 is certainly one of the best Live acts ever and often times, after I hear them play a song live, I'm able to appreciate the album version as I didn't before.
U2's music has always and imo, will always catch fire live. Where the passion and fire seems missing on the recording, it never is missing live. Live is far more important than studio. They are an amazing live act; Most definitely one of the best ever.

ceallach67 wrote:

Now... is U2 the biggest act in the world as we speak? Yeah, I'd say so. However, as I said, the biggest doesn't always mean the best. I know many artists that are considered unknown by mass appeal and Top 40 standards where the musicianship makes U2 look like amatuers. But we aren't talking in terms of that here, we are talking about what appeals to you personally... your favorites. That is what the original poster asked.

Really?

 

Who for example?

 

I think U2 are THE BIGGEST BECAUSE they are THE BEST -

 

THUS they have earned biggest and best.

 

image

 

But, you're right - it's a "Whose YOUR favorite?" thread, not a "Who do you think is the best?" thread.

 

I just think it takes nerve to not mention U2 in your top 5 at THEIR fan forum!

 

And it's also worth a real laugh at seeing who some people think are better..."to them"!

 

Whatever. You don't have to like those artists.
Get over it.
Yes, this is a fan forum, people here are fans.
Nowhere did it say that by joining a fan club that you weren't entitled to have other favorite artists.
In my case,
I didn't list U2 in my top 5 because I wanted to be able to list all of my all time favorites and still ended up listing 6.
U2 is definitely one of my top favorite artists of all time.
On any given day they could be the number 1 listened to or they could be not listened to at all.
On any given day, any of the artists I listen to could be my number one favorite. However, what I consider my all time top favorites are so because no matter what I may listen to, I will have always come back to my all time favorites for a listen and likely always will.
That's why they're my all time favorites.

And as far as musicians that are out and around today whose musicianship is better than U2's?
To be fair, that statement should be stricken since truly, I would be listing musicians who don't play rock music.
Because in all honesty, when you're talking the best musicians, you're not going to find them w/in the rock industry.
They generally are found in other genres, say Jazz for example and it would be unfair to compare them.
Likely you wouldn't know them anyhow.
Top Musicianship is not required to write a good selling rock/pop song so the whole thing is irrelevant.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

U2, Nine Inch Nails, Faith No More, Pixies and Queens of the mother feckin Stoneage.

 

And I'd agree with the above sentiment that biggest has nothing to do with best, and have many mates with great tastes in music who are constantlydisgusted with my drooling fanboy obsession for U2.

 

If you were to ask me who are the greatest bands of all time I'd give you a list containing many bands I like, many I don't like and several I despise.My personal favourites don't really factor into it,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mick james wrote:

U2, Nine Inch Nails, Faith No More, Pixies and Queens of the mother feckin Stoneage.

 

And I'd agree with the above sentiment that biggest has nothing to do with best, and have many mates with great tastes in music who are constantly disgusted with my drooling fanboy obsession for U2.

 

If you were to ask me who are the greatest bands of all time I'd give you a list containing many bands I like, many I don't like and several I despise. My personal favourites don't really factor into it,

 

Yup, that's how it should be. You can recognize that an artist deserves to be listed as the "best" without their music holding appeal to yourpersonal listening ear. Well said, Mick. Not many can do that.

 

There are many artists out there that I can acknowledge their music talent and song writing abilities even though their music doesn't have any personallistening appeal to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mick james wrote:

U2, Nine Inch Nails, Faith No More, Pixies and Queens of the mother feckin Stoneage.

 

And I'd agree with the above sentiment that biggest has nothing to do with best, and have many mates with great tastes in music who are constantly disgusted with my drooling fanboy obsession for U2.

 

If you were to ask me who are the greatest bands of all time I'd give you a list containing many bands I like, many I don't like and several I despise. My personal favourites don't really factor into it,

 

Yup, that's how it should be. You can recognize that an artist deserves to be listed as the "best" without their music holding appeal to yourpersonal listening ear. Well said, Mick. Not many can do that.

 

There are many artists out there that I can acknowledge their music talent and song writing abilities even though their music doesn't have any personallistening appeal to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and Big Audio Dynamite?????? Jaysus

Surely the Clash does a big steaming poo on anything Mick Jones did with his eckied up bollocks dance band, who had 3 good songs at best.

 

but if they're in your favourites than that's fine as they're in YOUR FAVOURITES.

 

And Bash, the Proclaimers are much loved in Oz too!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ceallach67 wrote:

sad eyes wrote:

ceallach67 wrote:

Sad Eyes... seriously, have you never heard of personal preference? I agree that U2 is certainly one of the best, but there are acts that have come before them that even they would not put themselves ahead of.

 

That's only because they are humble! Deep down inside I think they know that they are at the top of the heap; at least tied with other greats - I think they'd probably get a little chuckle if they read some of the bands that some of you thought were better - then they'd let it roll off like a duck's back!

 

Oh please. They are at the top of the heap now. They are not at the top of the heap of all time. And even they know that those who came before deserve the recognition for their influence on them as for example, they've said without bands like The Clash, there wouldn't be any U2. Now there are bands today who are crediting U2 in that way… as they should be acknowledged.


ceallach67 wrote:

Regardless, best is not really what we are talking about, what we are talking about is favorite. Just to ask... in your moment of judgment did you ever stop to consider that what you consider one hit wonders, were not one hit wonders in their own country? You do realize that people who post here are from other countries, don't you? And also, mass appeal does not equal good music. Just because something has popular appeal doesn't necessarily mean that musically it is the best.

Alright - I semi-apologize. I'm still laughing at anyone that puts some of the bands that they choose to put in the top 5 whilst not mentioning the greatest rock and roll band of all time!

 

But please, U2 is OFF THE CHARTS good - they deserve every bit of success they have had - popular appeal / musically / THE BEST!

 

I'd go so far as saying there are still MILLIONS that don't know what they are missing - my son being one of them who likes "Death Cab For Cutie" and totally doesn't "hear" / "get" U2.

 

Lead a horse to water yada yada yada!

 

Okay… well… "semi-apologize?" For what? Your arrogance or your ignorance? And to reiterate because apparently you're having some difficulty understanding this; the list was to be of people's top 5 FAVORITES, not what they thought the TOP 5 of ALL TIME was. I'll tell ya; you'd have to define a time period for that, because of ALL TIME? Nope, U2 doesn't make the top 5. Now if you said, currently the top 5 artists, certainly U2 would be there, in my opinion. Your arrogance is apparent with your statement that "MILLIONS that don't know what they're missing". Yeah, they do. They don't like U2… it's really not a crime.
The same could be said by any fan of any other artist as well. All a matter of preference and opinion... remember?

 

 

ceallach67 wrote:

I know many who would say that anyone who likes U2 has atrocious taste in music, especially with what they've been putting out lately. It's all a matter of opinion.

See I take offense to that, because their new music is EVERY BIT as good as their old music.

 

You're taking offense to my opinion? LOL… whatever blows your dress up. It's just an opinion, relax. Just because you think your opinion carries importance for others doesn't mean I think mine does, no need to take offense. And no, sorry, none of what is on NLOTH even comes close to the brilliance of their older material. That comes from both my fan opinion and my musical (as a musician) opinion. However, it is mostly personal preference opinion based on having been there in the 80's when the older stuff was released and seeing the raw passion and fire they had back then. Of course, it stands to reason that has a band ages and matures as well as finds huge success, much of that raw hunger and passion will subside because of the conveniences and success afforded them. That's a given. But… and that's a big BUT… U2, whether it is I like the new stuff or not, should always be credited with never being afraid to reinvent themselves often. That I respect totally. I do not have to like the newer material to know and respect that about them. If you want to mention forgettable… let's talk NLOTH. Not even two months after its release and it's out of the top 10 already? That sounds pretty forgettable to me. Personally, the new album just doesn't make me want to go back to it and listen to it. Where, take The Unforgettable Fire,
an
album that is 25 years old now, (God that's hard to believe), and there are times when I just have to put that on and listen to it because I just have to hear it. Not so much with NLOTH. But, hey, I know there are people out there where it is that way for them with the new album and that's awesome. I can't wait to hear those songs live, because as it is, U2 is certainly one of the best Live acts ever and often times, after I hear them play a song live, I'm able to appreciate the album version as I didn't before. U2's music has always and imo, will always catch fire live. Where the passion and fire seems missing on the recording, it never is missing live. Live is far more important than studio. They are an amazing live act; Most definitely one of the best ever.

ceallach67 wrote:

Now... is U2 the biggest act in the world as we speak? Yeah, I'd say so. However, as I said, the biggest doesn't always mean the best. I know many artists that are considered unknown by mass appeal and Top 40 standards where the musicianship makes U2 look like amatuers. But we aren't talking in terms of that here, we are talking about what appeals to you personally... your favorites. That is what the original poster asked.

Really?

 

Who for example?

 

I think U2 are THE BIGGEST BECAUSE they are THE BEST -

 

THUS they have earned biggest and best.

 

image

 

But, you're right - it's a "Whose YOUR favorite?" thread, not a "Who do you think is the best?" thread.

 

I just think it takes nerve to not mention U2 in your top 5 at THEIR fan forum!

 

And it's also worth a real laugh at seeing who some people think are better..."to them"!

 

Whatever. You don't have to like those artists. Get over it. Yes, this is a fan forum, people here are fans. Nowhere did it say that by joining a fan club that you weren't entitled to have other favorite artists. In my case, I didn't list U2 in my top 5 because I wanted to be able to list all of my all time favorites and still ended up listing 6. U2 is definitely one of my top favorite artists of all time. On any given day they could be the number 1 listened to or they could be not listened to at all. On any given day, any of the artists I listen to could be my number one favorite. However, what I consider my all time top favorites are so because no matter what I may listen to, I will have always come back to my all time favorites for a listen and likely always will. That's why they're my all time favorites.

And as far as musicians that are out and around today whose musicianship is better than U2's? To be fair, that statement should be stricken since truly, I would be listing musicians who don't play rock music. Because in all honesty, when you're talking the best musicians, you're not going to find them w/in the rock industry. They generally are found in other genres, say Jazz for example and it would be unfair to compare them. Likely you wouldn't know them anyhow. Top Musicianship is not required to write a good selling rock/pop song so the whole thing is irrelevant.

 

 

*Basher bows to Kellys kick ass reply*......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ceallach67 wrote:

mick james wrote:

U2, Nine Inch Nails, Faith No More, Pixies and Queens of the mother feckin Stoneage.

 

And I'd agree with the above sentiment that biggest has nothing to do with best, and have many mates with great tastes in music who are constantly disgusted with my drooling fanboy obsession for U2.

 

If you were to ask me who are the greatest bands of all time I'd give you a list containing many bands I like, many I don't like and several I despise. My personal favourites don't really factor into it,

 

Yup, that's how it should be. You can recognize that an artist deserves to be listed as the "best" without their music holding appeal to your personal listening ear. Well said, Mick. Not many can do that.

 

There are many artists out there that I can acknowledge their music talent and song writing abilities even though their music doesn't have any personal listening appeal to me.

So true Ceallach,

 

I honestly can say I've never been a fan of Elvis, the Beatles, Kiss, Bruce Sprinsteen,Queen, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd etc etc, and honestly I'd rathersee Faith No More any day of the week ( btw THEY'RE BACK TOGETHER HUURRAAHH!!!!)

 

but I would be ignoring history, and indicating that I don't actually understand popular music if I denied that these are by all means some of the mostimportant, and influential bands in the history of rock music - and that many bands that I do enjoy would not exist if it wasn't for the hard work of thebands mentioned.

 

 

ps Ceallach, don't get a shock by the bands I mentioned! I grew up in the 90s listening to U2, Sonic Youth, Ministry and the Beastie Boys!roll.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mick james wrote:

ceallach67 wrote:

mick james wrote:

U2, Nine Inch Nails, Faith No More, Pixies and Queens of the mother feckin Stoneage.

 

And I'd agree with the above sentiment that biggest has nothing to do with best, and have many mates with great tastes in music who are constantly disgusted with my drooling fanboy obsession for U2.

 

If you were to ask me who are the greatest bands of all time I'd give you a list containing many bands I like, many I don't like and several I despise. My personal favourites don't really factor into it,

 

Yup, that's how it should be. You can recognize that an artist deserves to be listed as the "best" without their music holding appeal to your personal listening ear. Well said, Mick. Not many can do that.

 

There are many artists out there that I can acknowledge their music talent and song writing abilities even though their music doesn't have any personal listening appeal to me.

So true Ceallach,

 

I honestly can say I've never been a fan of Elvis, the Beatles, Kiss, Bruce Sprinsteen,Queen, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd etc etc, and honestly I'd rather see Faith No More any day of the week ( btw THEY'RE BACK TOGETHER HUURRAAHH!!!!)

 

but I would be ignoring history, and indicating that I don't actually understand popular music if I denied that these are by all means some of the most important, and influential bands in the history of rock music - and that many bands that I do enjoy would not exist if it wasn't for the hard work of the bands mentioned.

 

 

ps Ceallach, don't get a shock by the bands I mentioned! I grew up in the 90s listening to U2, Sonic Youth, Ministry and the Beastie Boys!
image

 

 

There are many artists whose work I think is stellar that doesn't appeal to me musically. At the same time, there are artists whose music I like to listento where I don't think they know more than 3 major chords. LOL! Gotta give props to the good fun time Rock n Roll music. It all has its time and placedepending on my mood.

 

No shock here, man. I love of all that. And yeah... big WOOT for Faith No More. Great band. I love Ministry, too and I'm a huge Primus fan. I listento some stuff that I'm pretty sure most here wouldn't like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mick james wrote:

ceallach67 wrote:

mick james wrote:

U2, Nine Inch Nails, Faith No More, Pixies and Queens of the mother feckin Stoneage.

 

And I'd agree with the above sentiment that biggest has nothing to do with best, and have many mates with great tastes in music who are constantly disgusted with my drooling fanboy obsession for U2.

 

If you were to ask me who are the greatest bands of all time I'd give you a list containing many bands I like, many I don't like and several I despise. My personal favourites don't really factor into it,

 

Yup, that's how it should be. You can recognize that an artist deserves to be listed as the "best" without their music holding appeal to your personal listening ear. Well said, Mick. Not many can do that.

 

There are many artists out there that I can acknowledge their music talent and song writing abilities even though their music doesn't have any personal listening appeal to me.

So true Ceallach,

 

I honestly can say I've never been a fan of Elvis, the Beatles, Kiss, Bruce Sprinsteen,Queen, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd etc etc, and honestly I'd rather see Faith No More any day of the week ( btw THEY'RE BACK TOGETHER HUURRAAHH!!!!)

 

but I would be ignoring history, and indicating that I don't actually understand popular music if I denied that these are by all means some of the most important, and influential bands in the history of rock music - and that many bands that I do enjoy would not exist if it wasn't for the hard work of the bands mentioned.

 

 

ps Ceallach, don't get a shock by the bands I mentioned! I grew up in the 90s listening to U2, Sonic Youth, Ministry and the Beastie Boys!
image

 

 

There are many artists whose work I think is stellar that doesn't appeal to me musically. At the same time, there are artists whose music I like to listento where I don't think they know more than 3 major chords. LOL! Gotta give props to the good fun time Rock n Roll music. It all has its time and placedepending on my mood.

 

No shock here, man. I love of all that. And yeah... big WOOT for Faith No More. Great band. I love Ministry, too and I'm a huge Primus fan. I listento some stuff that I'm pretty sure most here wouldn't like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ceallach67 wrote:

mick james wrote:

ceallach67 wrote:

mick james wrote:

U2, Nine Inch Nails, Faith No More, Pixies and Queens of the mother feckin Stoneage.

 

And I'd agree with the above sentiment that biggest has nothing to do with best, and have many mates with great tastes in music who are constantly disgusted with my drooling fanboy obsession for U2.

 

If you were to ask me who are the greatest bands of all time I'd give you a list containing many bands I like, many I don't like and several I despise. My personal favourites don't really factor into it,

 

Yup, that's how it should be. You can recognize that an artist deserves to be listed as the "best" without their music holding appeal to your personal listening ear. Well said, Mick. Not many can do that.

 

There are many artists out there that I can acknowledge their music talent and song writing abilities even though their music doesn't have any personal listening appeal to me.

So true Ceallach,

 

I honestly can say I've never been a fan of Elvis, the Beatles, Kiss, Bruce Sprinsteen,Queen, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd etc etc, and honestly I'd rather see Faith No More any day of the week ( btw THEY'RE BACK TOGETHER HUURRAAHH!!!!)

 

but I would be ignoring history, and indicating that I don't actually understand popular music if I denied that these are by all means some of the most important, and influential bands in the history of rock music - and that many bands that I do enjoy would not exist if it wasn't for the hard work of the bands mentioned.

 

 

ps Ceallach, don't get a shock by the bands I mentioned! I grew up in the 90s listening to U2, Sonic Youth, Ministry and the Beastie Boys!laugh.gif I got to see Ministry in 95 too, which I still think about with fondness tothis day! "Never Trust A Junkie!!" Uncle Al is my man!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And here's me thinking I was alone in the world being a massive Ministry/U2 fan! laugh.gif

 

I saw Ministry a couple of years back, and the tickets were $66.60! Too funny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, quite the argument. I think Sad Eyes must be burnt to a crisp :P

My Top 3

1. U2 hands down

2. Bruce Springsteen

3. Red Hot Chili Peppers

I can only list three, because anything beyond that would be claiming I knew more about a band than I actually do, and I got burned on that one long ago. WhenI was about 14 I said I 'liked' Led Zeppelin, only to have a FRIEND bitch me out for knowing a grand total of two songs by the band, haha. So I'mnot going there again.

I am no musician...I have epically failed at just about every instrument I've picked up. So my opinion comes from what I can hear, and what I can feel. DoU2 SOUND the best to me? Yeah. But what's much more important is how they make me feel. No other band's music makes me feel the way U2's does, andso that's why they are my favorite. And that's all a matter of opinion.

I must say, Sad Eyes sounds a bit like me at 15. I just ran around screaming in everyone's face that U2 were the greatest thing since sliced bread and ifthey didn't agree, they could go f**k themselves. Thankfully, I matured. I still think they're the best thing since sliced bread-but everyone isentitled to their opinion, and this is an opinion thread! I would never feel the need to start yelling at anouther fan. We're all here for the samereason...we all love the same band. Why bitch at someone because they don't have the exact same opinion as you? Accept it and move on. Kudos to Kelly forsetting Sad Eyes straight :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

tacosontheceiling wrote:

Wow, quite the argument. I think Sad Eyes must be burnt to a crisp
:P

My Top 3

1. U2 hands down

2. Bruce Springsteen

3. Red Hot Chili Peppers

I can only list three, because anything beyond that would be claiming I knew more about a band than I actually do, and I got burned on that one long ago. When I was about 14 I said I 'liked' Led Zeppelin, only to have a FRIEND bitch me out for knowing a grand total of two songs by the band, haha. So I'm not going there again.

I am no musician...I have epically failed at just about every instrument I've picked up. So my opinion comes from what I can hear, and what I can feel. Do U2 SOUND the best to me? Yeah. But what's much more important is how they make me feel. No other band's music makes me feel the way U2's does, and so that's why they are my favorite. And that's all a matter of opinion.

I must say, Sad Eyes sounds a bit like me at 15. I just ran around screaming in everyone's face that U2 were the greatest thing since sliced bread and if they didn't agree, they could go f**k themselves. Thankfully, I matured. I still think they're the best thing since sliced bread-but everyone is entitled to their opinion, and this is an opinion thread! I would never feel the need to start yelling at anouther fan. We're all here for the same reason...we all love the same band. Why bitch at someone because they don't have the exact same opinion as you? Accept it and move on. Kudos to Kelly for setting Sad Eyes straight
:D

Great honest answer.

I also think U2's the greatest thing since sliced bread,

but I can also totally understand how some people think they're like a bit of burnt toast, old bread covered in mould, the last peice of bread in the loafin the staff caffateria with other peoples finger marks all over it or that piece of bread that always manages to fall butter side down on an icky kitchenfloor.laugh.gif

 

If we all liked the same music how freaking boring would it be? It would be musical Communism, and we'd have no way of knowing what was good or whatwasn't.

Art is in the eye of the beholder.

 

To quote some guy "I don't know what it is.... so it must be art"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mick james wrote:
Great honest answer.

I also think U2's the greatest thing since sliced bread,

but I can also totally understand how some people think they're like a bit of burnt toast, old bread covered in mould, the last peice of bread in the loaf in the staff caffateria with other peoples finger marks all over it or that piece of bread that always manages to fall butter side down on an icky kitchen floor.roll.gif. You're exactlyright...different opinions are what make the world interesting. It would be very boring if everyone agreed all the time...there wouldn't be much to talkabout.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tacosontheceiling wrote:
mick james wrote:
Great honest answer.

I also think U2's the greatest thing since sliced bread,

but I can also totally understand how some people think they're like a bit of burnt toast, old bread covered in mould, the last peice of bread in the loaf in the staff caffateria with other peoples finger marks all over it or that piece of bread that always manages to fall butter side down on an icky kitchen floor.roll.gif Maybe you can point me out to a good NYC bagel!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wink.gif
mick james wrote:

ceallach67 wrote:

mick james wrote:

ceallach67 wrote:

mick james wrote:

U2, Nine Inch Nails, Faith No More, Pixies and Queens of the mother feckin Stoneage.

 

And I'd agree with the above sentiment that biggest has nothing to do with best, and have many mates with great tastes in music who are constantly disgusted with my drooling fanboy obsession for U2.

 

If you were to ask me who are the greatest bands of all time I'd give you a list containing many bands I like, many I don't like and several I despise. My personal favourites don't really factor into it,

 

Yup, that's how it should be. You can recognize that an artist deserves to be listed as the "best" without their music holding appeal to your personal listening ear. Well said, Mick. Not many can do that.

 

There are many artists out there that I can acknowledge their music talent and song writing abilities even though their music doesn't have any personal listening appeal to me.

So true Ceallach,

 

I honestly can say I've never been a fan of Elvis, the Beatles, Kiss, Bruce Sprinsteen,Queen, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd etc etc, and honestly I'd rather see Faith No More any day of the week ( btw THEY'RE BACK TOGETHER HUURRAAHH!!!!)

 

but I would be ignoring history, and indicating that I don't actually understand popular music if I denied that these are by all means some of the most important, and influential bands in the history of rock music - and that many bands that I do enjoy would not exist if it wasn't for the hard work of the bands mentioned.

 

 

ps Ceallach, don't get a shock by the bands I mentioned! I grew up in the 90s listening to U2, Sonic Youth, Ministry and the Beastie Boys!tongue.gif Ended up in a few mosh pits (unintentionally) back inthe day. Yikes. Ruuuuuun, Forest... ruuuuuuuuun! Crowd surfing... what a time. Primus opened for U2 on the ZooTV tour... how cool is that? I preferredPrimus in the club scene and Les Claypool live is as close to eurphoria as I can get. To see him live is to worship at the bass altar of Claypool. *bows*

 

"Never Trust A Junkie"... wise words there... "just one fix". wink.gif Ministry kicked major A.

 

You do realize that by mentioning a "walk man" you're dating yourself, right? I remember fondly that heavy as a brick sized "portable"technology. Hard to believe that was portable in comparision to the iPod now. Oh and Primus still remains on my iPod. Some Ministy too. For when I'm inthat kind of mood. Got to have music for all moods. Words I live by.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wink.gif
mick james wrote:

ceallach67 wrote:

mick james wrote:

ceallach67 wrote:

mick james wrote:

U2, Nine Inch Nails, Faith No More, Pixies and Queens of the mother feckin Stoneage.

 

And I'd agree with the above sentiment that biggest has nothing to do with best, and have many mates with great tastes in music who are constantly disgusted with my drooling fanboy obsession for U2.

 

If you were to ask me who are the greatest bands of all time I'd give you a list containing many bands I like, many I don't like and several I despise. My personal favourites don't really factor into it,

 

Yup, that's how it should be. You can recognize that an artist deserves to be listed as the "best" without their music holding appeal to your personal listening ear. Well said, Mick. Not many can do that.

 

There are many artists out there that I can acknowledge their music talent and song writing abilities even though their music doesn't have any personal listening appeal to me.

So true Ceallach,

 

I honestly can say I've never been a fan of Elvis, the Beatles, Kiss, Bruce Sprinsteen,Queen, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd etc etc, and honestly I'd rather see Faith No More any day of the week ( btw THEY'RE BACK TOGETHER HUURRAAHH!!!!)

 

but I would be ignoring history, and indicating that I don't actually understand popular music if I denied that these are by all means some of the most important, and influential bands in the history of rock music - and that many bands that I do enjoy would not exist if it wasn't for the hard work of the bands mentioned.

 

 

ps Ceallach, don't get a shock by the bands I mentioned! I grew up in the 90s listening to U2, Sonic Youth, Ministry and the Beastie Boys!tongue.gif Ended up in a few mosh pits (unintentionally) back inthe day. Yikes. Ruuuuuun, Forest... ruuuuuuuuun! Crowd surfing... what a time. Primus opened for U2 on the ZooTV tour... how cool is that? I preferredPrimus in the club scene and Les Claypool live is as close to eurphoria as I can get. To see him live is to worship at the bass altar of Claypool. *bows*

 

"Never Trust A Junkie"... wise words there... "just one fix". wink.gif Ministry kicked major A.

 

You do realize that by mentioning a "walk man" you're dating yourself, right? I remember fondly that heavy as a brick sized "portable"technology. Hard to believe that was portable in comparision to the iPod now. Oh and Primus still remains on my iPod. Some Ministy too. For when I'm inthat kind of mood. Got to have music for all moods. Words I live by.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

tacosontheceiling wrote:

Wow, quite the argument. I think Sad Eyes must be burnt to a crisp
:P

My Top 3

1. U2 hands down

2. Bruce Springsteen

3. Red Hot Chili Peppers

I can only list three, because anything beyond that would be claiming I knew more about a band than I actually do, and I got burned on that one long ago. When I was about 14 I said I 'liked' Led Zeppelin, only to have a FRIEND bitch me out for knowing a grand total of two songs by the band, haha. So I'm not going there again.

I am no musician...I have epically failed at just about every instrument I've picked up. So my opinion comes from what I can hear, and what I can feel. Do U2 SOUND the best to me? Yeah. But what's much more important is how they make me feel. No other band's music makes me feel the way U2's does, and so that's why they are my favorite. And that's all a matter of opinion.

I must say, Sad Eyes sounds a bit like me at 15. I just ran around screaming in everyone's face that U2 were the greatest thing since sliced bread and if they didn't agree, they could go f**k themselves. Thankfully, I matured. I still think they're the best thing since sliced bread-but everyone is entitled to their opinion, and this is an opinion thread! I would never feel the need to start yelling at anouther fan. We're all here for the same reason...we all love the same band. Why bitch at someone because they don't have the exact same opinion as you? Accept it and move on. Kudos to Kelly for setting Sad Eyes straight
:D

 

Thanks Tacos and very well stated. I really wasn't intending to burn anyone to a crisp. Just trying to provide some perspective. There's nosetting anyone straight in matters of opinion. Sad Eyes is totally entitled to feel U2 is the best band in the world. I understand how he/she feels that way. I feel that way at times. Especially live when Edge busts out with that spine tingling opening to "Streets" If you were to ask me then, I'dsay, "This is the best effing band EVER!" It's just that you can't really expect everyone to feel that way... no matter how awesome it isto you.

 

The beauty of music is what it means to people. Music is meant to drive you, uplift you, inspire you, touch you emotionally... whatever. It's a constantcompanion of mine. Because music is so powerful, it's only understandable that people defend what moves them. So I get that. But at the same time, what moves me may not be what moves another because it's a personal connection, so I can't expect anyone else to get what I'm getting from a band. That's all I'm saying.

 

My apologies to Sad Eyes, if I came across too bitchy. Not my intention at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

tacosontheceiling wrote:

Wow, quite the argument. I think Sad Eyes must be burnt to a crisp
:P

My Top 3

1. U2 hands down

2. Bruce Springsteen

3. Red Hot Chili Peppers

I can only list three, because anything beyond that would be claiming I knew more about a band than I actually do, and I got burned on that one long ago. When I was about 14 I said I 'liked' Led Zeppelin, only to have a FRIEND bitch me out for knowing a grand total of two songs by the band, haha. So I'm not going there again.

I am no musician...I have epically failed at just about every instrument I've picked up. So my opinion comes from what I can hear, and what I can feel. Do U2 SOUND the best to me? Yeah. But what's much more important is how they make me feel. No other band's music makes me feel the way U2's does, and so that's why they are my favorite. And that's all a matter of opinion.

I must say, Sad Eyes sounds a bit like me at 15. I just ran around screaming in everyone's face that U2 were the greatest thing since sliced bread and if they didn't agree, they could go f**k themselves. Thankfully, I matured. I still think they're the best thing since sliced bread-but everyone is entitled to their opinion, and this is an opinion thread! I would never feel the need to start yelling at anouther fan. We're all here for the same reason...we all love the same band. Why bitch at someone because they don't have the exact same opinion as you? Accept it and move on. Kudos to Kelly for setting Sad Eyes straight
:D

 

Thanks Tacos and very well stated. I really wasn't intending to burn anyone to a crisp. Just trying to provide some perspective. There's nosetting anyone straight in matters of opinion. Sad Eyes is totally entitled to feel U2 is the best band in the world. I understand how he/she feels that way. I feel that way at times. Especially live when Edge busts out with that spine tingling opening to "Streets" If you were to ask me then, I'dsay, "This is the best effing band EVER!" It's just that you can't really expect everyone to feel that way... no matter how awesome it isto you.

 

The beauty of music is what it means to people. Music is meant to drive you, uplift you, inspire you, touch you emotionally... whatever. It's a constantcompanion of mine. Because music is so powerful, it's only understandable that people defend what moves them. So I get that. But at the same time, what moves me may not be what moves another because it's a personal connection, so I can't expect anyone else to get what I'm getting from a band. That's all I'm saying.

 

My apologies to Sad Eyes, if I came across too bitchy. Not my intention at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...