You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: U2 - Acoustic Achtung Babies
http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/ … e-20110623
must be nice to be a fan of a band who does things the right way ALL THE TIME....
Re: U2 - Acoustic Achtung Babies
U2 named GQ's band of the year for 2011
[youtube]BgTOeMo8yis&feature=feedu[/youtube]
ona side note Bono and The Edge did an interview recently where they expressed they feel that U2 is on the verge of becoming irrelevant. Hmmmm... Perhaps in terms of modern pop music but definitely not irrelevant on the international stage in terms of fan interest. Although if they feel this way maybe that's a good thing for a new record. Last time they felt a similar way they made Achtung Baby so....
Re: U2 - Acoustic Achtung Babies
I think mostly all rock bands are pretty much irrelevant these days. Obviously U2, Bon Jovi, etc. are still hugely popular and successful. But I doubt they're gaining many new (young) fans. Rock music is dead in terms of the pop culture, unfortunately. I don't know what or why it happened, but it's not the 80's or 90's anymore where rock bands could dominate the charts and be the cool "IN" thing. We are far removed from those days, and have been for some time.
Re: U2 - Acoustic Achtung Babies
U2 named GQ's band of the year for 2011
[youtube]BgTOeMo8yis&feature=feedu[/youtube]ona side note Bono and The Edge did an interview recently where they expressed they feel that U2 is on the verge of becoming irrelevant. Hmmmm... Perhaps in terms of modern pop music but definitely not irrelevant on the international stage in terms of fan interest. Although if they feel this way maybe that's a good thing for a new record. Last time they felt a similar way they made Achtung Baby so....
Not sure you have to go that far back Bono. I think we argued this years ago but I stand by my comment that U2 was pretty irrelevant in the late 90s. I'd say from 1995-2000 they weren't big. Thought of as possibly done with. Then they came back huge with Beautiful Day & All That you Can't Leave Behind.
I guess I understand them being chosen, although myb not really. Just too much of a safe choice. It's GQ though, not a music mag, so it doesn't matter much. I think rock music heading fast downhill. Possibly ending, to be brutally honest. Some new hits now & then but most kids already have all the genres they can ask for, and just enter in on their Iphone or pandora & viola. Here in Philly the huge rock station 94.1 WYSP shut down & became the FM version of our AM sports talk radio station. Sucks, and the station was no fluke. It had been a rock radio station since the 70s. But since cars now come with ipod adaptors & Sirius radio ratings were probably dropping. Since sportstalk is always new & listened to, they pulled the plug & made the switch over Labor Day. Sayanora rock radio.
Re: U2 - Acoustic Achtung Babies
ona side note Bono and The Edge did an interview recently where they expressed they feel that U2 is on the verge of becoming irrelevant. Hmmmm... Perhaps in terms of modern pop music but definitely not irrelevant on the international stage in terms of fan interest. Although if they feel this way maybe that's a good thing for a new record. Last time they felt a similar way they made Achtung Baby so....
They're U2 of course they're irrelevant
- monkeychow
- Rep: 661
Re: U2 - Acoustic Achtung Babies
Relevancy is a measure of now.
Relevancy is for the current teenage stars with their tight asses or lack of chest hair or whatever made them flash in the pan famous.
Relevancy is about what the people who control public perception tell us to enjoy at any one moment, and that changes each year like fashion in women's haircuts.
Relevancy is about your ranking as the next big thing, or how you compare to the pretenders to your spot in the media.
Relevancy is about TIME and how important you are as a new player with unknown longevity.
U2 is well beyond relevancy.
They are more like bands like Led Zep, The Stones, Aerosmith.
Love them or hate them we know what they are now. And what they've achieved over the years.
The band has moved from being judged against the standard to becomming the standard.
Relevancy is for the current political players trying to get in office, being the standard is like being washington or regan or clinton or whoever. Someone who is remembered for what they did, and changed what came after them.
Aerosmith has been irrelevant for decades. But then if some new singer comes along who sounds like steven styler. That's exactly what you'll say about it. He sounds like steven tyler. No one expects tyler to be important to teenagers...but his always going to be a part of the history of singers.
u2 doesn't need to be relevant. They have 20+ years of playing with the same line up. They have 22 grammy awards. They have sold 150 million records. They have countless hit songs.
If something new sounds like a U2 song or sounds like bono. THAT's what it's compared to. You don't go "oh that's another of those poppy new bands" you say "that guy sounds like bono".
They continue to make a fortune each year because they are a KNOWN commodity that people like....relevancy is about being new and unknown and short term. U2 should be happy they are irrelevant!
