Bono: U2 Won't Be Back For A While

Bono has revealed that U2 won't be "back for a while" as the plan to take a well deserved break.

The band, who recently finished their 360 world tour, said they won't be heading back on the road "for a while".

Speaking at the GQ Awards, Bono told Metro: "They say every tour is ten days too long. Not with this one. We genuinely loved every single night and at the end we were so sad."

Whilst collecting their award for Best Band, Bono told the audience: "Growing up is not what is meant to happen to a rock band. It has happened, we are now men."

Other guests on the red carpet included Blur's Alex James, Keith Richards of the Rolling Stones, Dizzee Rascal, boy band One Direction, The Saturdays, Kylie Minogue, Pixie Lott and Leona Lewis.

As previously reported, the frontman dismissed rumours that he suffered a "heart scare" whilst on tour.

Thanks for the report to Gigwise.com.

Comments

[Krieger91]

It's a beautful day..

[CrazyPigeon]

The 360 tour was epic. I saw them at Cardiff and it was beautiful.

[bassmike200]

yay!!!

[nnb]

After a massive 2 year tour I would expect so.

Krieger91 wrote:

It's a beautful day..

For someone who seems to be glad their not going to be around, I find it ironic that you quote one of their songs.

bassmike200 wrote:

yay!!!

This guy has the right idea.Yay indeed.

[Krieger91]

nnb wrote:

After a massive 2 year tour I would expect so.


Krieger91 wrote:

It's a beautful day..

For someone who seems to be glad their not going to be around, I find it ironic that you quote one of their songs.

Dude, it was just a damn joke..

[MyS3lF]

[sewoo55]

good news

[intothe]

A shame, I didn't get to see them even though I wanted to, but I'm sure they'll be back in a while

[spitch]

finally

[MoreGilmourII]

Inb4 a bunch of 15yr old tweens bash U2 for no real reason.

''hurr durr Bono douchebag durr durr can't sing hurpa lurp durpy doo''

[AcdcTXfan]

Love U2, but they deserve a break. Glad I got to see them this year.

[Shredder425]

Amazing band and a well deserved break!!!

[Mcers]

huzzah! take an extra long break... please don't come back...

[burghUK]

too many hipsters and metalheads here , U2 are an excellent band and you hate them because they are mainstream. Admit it c*nts.

[Tarsplitter]

Mcers wrote:

huzzah! take an extra long break... please don't come back...

What an original comment!
Now please do tell how them going away will improve your daily life?

[drug.me.2.hell]

I dont like Bono, but the music is goood

[Revolover]

I don't hate U2 because they are mainstream, I hate them because I almost drowned in delay once and listening to them gives me vietnam flash-backs

[thewalrus77]

i hope they never come back

[MikeBTE]

WOOOOOH LAMB OF GOD CIRCLE PITTTTT!!!!!

[taytay8b]

Saw them twice on this tour. You can argue this but they are, and always will be, one of the world's biggest and BEST bands. I have never seen a band literally make everyone come together as one. Truly inspirational.

[grizzrodehed]

best news i've heard in a long time...

[stepco12345]

*Checked*

[i_am_metalhead]

We can only hope that this is a permanent break...

[Jmoarguitar]

glad to say I was at their final show, there is a very uplifting vibe in the air at their shows. I brought my friend who actually disliked U2 and mostly listened to thrash (I love metal aswell), and he left saying it was the greatest concert he's been too.

[jimmy-moto]

Has anyone else seen "It Might Get Loud" and laughed at The Edge when he was trying to play something other than simple chords loaded with effects?

[Radz117]

burghUK wrote:

too many hipsters and metalheads here , U2 are an excellent band and you hate them because they are mainstream. Admit it c*nts.

I think most people hate U2 because of Bono and the fact that The Edge uses one of the worst guitar tones in the history of electronic guitar music. And he uses it all the time.

[ebmusicman16]

yay hopefully forever!

[Basti95]

"Bashing U2 for no real reason"

They suck, that's reason enough right...?

[wemonir]

Revolover wrote:

I don't hate U2 because they are mainstream, I hate them because I almost drowned in delay once and listening to them gives me vietnam flash-backs

lol

[ledzep426]

After the amazing shows they put on this tour, they deserve to do whatever the hell they want.

[slashNpage77]

You know, I saw U2 on the 360 tour, and, as a fan of metal and lot of other shit, they were ****ing awesome. They are a seriously talented group of musicians, and you can't really deny that.

[tagyoureit]

Now that he's all growed up, pehaps he will focus on his billion dollar private equity fund.

[wurstsuppe666]

drug.me.2.hell wrote:

I dont like Bono, but the music is goood

true!

[CaliforniaKid]

i_am_metalhead wrote:

We can only hope that this is a permanent break...

Yes because they are totally NOT METAL and everything should be METAL because I'm an narrow minded prepubescent douchenozzle.

[IRONxPANTERA]

good news! =D

[ZigmaMetal]

Too many hipsters and metal heads who like their drop Ab shit metalcore are trolling here. U2=better then you

[akerfeldt]

jimmy-moto wrote:

Has anyone else seen "It Might Get Loud" and laughed at The Edge when he was trying to play something other than simple chords loaded with effects?

+1 lol. i used to like this band, then I went to one of their shows. it's hard to believe that a band with a career 20+ long would play a song twice in one night. damn shame.

[akerfeldt]

that is, play their latest single twice.

[Witezombi3]

THANK GOD

[nnb]

Krieger91 wrote:

nnb wrote:

After a massive 2 year tour I would expect so.


Krieger91 wrote:

It's a beautful day..

For someone who seems to be glad their not going to be around, I find it ironic that you quote one of their songs.
Dude, it was just a damn joke..

I know, and it was actually better then all the other they suck/I hate you crap comments. +1 for that.

akerfeldt wrote:

that is, play their latest single twice.

....Seriously?

[xwf]

burghUK wrote:

too many hipsters and metalheads here , U2 are an excellent band and you hate them because they are mainstream. Admit it c*nts.

No, I hate them because they have made the same record over and over again for about 30 years now. They are garbage.

[Krieger91]

nnb wrote:

Krieger91 wrote:

nnb wrote:

After a massive 2 year tour I would expect so.


Krieger91 wrote:

It's a beautful day..

For someone who seems to be glad their not going to be around, I find it ironic that you quote one of their songs.
Dude, it was just a damn joke..

I know, and it was actually better then all the other they suck/I hate you crap comments. +1 for that.

Haha thanks.
But seriously, though they aren't a band i particularly like, I couldn't care less.
As someone else said, it's not going to change my life in the slighest mini micro of ways..it's just the first thing that came to mind when I read the article.

[Svennz]

ive never understood the hate for u2...

[Koethe]

They write different, melodic music. You know, something that people who ARE NOT angry teenagers can listen to.

[Evews333]

Revolover wrote:

I don't hate U2 because they are mainstream, I hate them because I almost drowned in delay once and listening to them gives me vietnam flash-backs

I am a U2 fan, but this guy wins.

[arnolddrummer]

intothe wrote:

A shame, I didn't get to see them even though I wanted to, but I'm sure they'll be back in a while

You may have missed the title, which clearly states " U2 won't be back for a while"

[Lemoninfluence]

checked

[swave75]

I saw them once for the "Pop" tour. Though it wasn't a very good album it was cool to say I saw them once. Now Bono can go try to save the world and collect sun glasses.

[Sound_Garden_X]

I think Bono is a bit of an ass but I do enjoy their music. They deserve a break after a long tour like this.

[Bassically]

Best news i've heard today.

[DurpaDurpa]

There's too much bullshit involved with U2, that's why i hate them. Why can't artists just play music and nothing else. They think they need to convince everyone that their shit don't stink in as many ways as possible. Well, friend, it does, and sometimes your music just reeks of it, so focus on that and not something irrelevant to what people got into you for in the first place.

[noisewall11]

Revolover wrote:

I don't hate U2 because they are mainstream, I hate them because I almost drowned in delay once and listening to them gives me vietnam flash-backs

not a U2 fan or their delay drowning either. ironically i'm a big fan of other bands which drown you in delay/reverb and do it much better than them.

DurpaDurpa wrote:

There's too much bullshit involved with U2, that's why i hate them. Why can't artists just play music and nothing else. They think they need to convince everyone that their shit don't stink in as many ways as possible. Well, friend, it does, and sometimes your music just reeks of it, so focus on that and not something irrelevant to what people got into you for in the first place.

WIN.

[headbang123]

+1 U.G.
For using the word whilst twice

[Oblivion_Rps]

Well I guess every rock band that's been around for so long needs a break.

[Diek321]

The U2 hate is only due to their musical simplicity. The people who you keep reffering to as "hipsters/douchebags" are just people who look for MORE in music than just entertainment. They just happen to like music which is a lot more complex, interesting and beautiful.
So drop the "hipsters", it just makes you ignorant.
And no offence here, but U2 does pretty much suck when you put them up against other bands, so just embrace it like a real fanboy. Ex:
Fanboy: "I like U2 forever even though it sucks compared to other bands..."
I LOVE bands who really suck compared to other bands I like, but it doesn´t mean I don´t like them/listen to them anymore...
End of story.
(Again, no offence to anyone, it´s just how it is)

[myownenemy]

Diek321 wrote:

The U2 hate is only due to their musical simplicity. The people who you keep reffering to as "hipsters/douchebags" are just people who look for MORE in music than just entertainment. They just happen to like music which is a lot more complex, interesting and beautiful.
So drop the "hipsters", it just makes you ignorant.
And no offence here, but U2 does pretty much suck when you put them up against other bands, so just embrace it like a real fanboy. Ex:
Fanboy: "I like U2 forever even though it sucks compared to other bands..."
I LOVE bands who really suck compared to other bands I like, but it doesn´t mean I don´t like them/listen to them anymore...
End of story.
(Again, no offence to anyone, it´s just how it is)

Then there are those of us who love musical complexity and musical simplicity. Those of us who view music as an art. Both simplicity and complexity can be good.

[brandon-hammond]

I dont know why everyone is so happy, Like yeah they need a break, but they are 1 of not many real music bands that can make millins on there own, if they leave just another rapper is going to come into the world and nobody will know who U2 is, Im glad there taking a break but im sad, Now there taking them selves out of the game that they might not be able to join again.

[myownenemy]

brandon-hammond wrote:

I dont know why everyone is so happy, Like yeah they need a break, but they are 1 of not many real music bands that can make millins on there own, if they leave just another rapper is going to come into the world and nobody will know who U2 is, Im glad there taking a break but im sad, Now there taking them selves out of the game that they might not be able to join again.

The Beatles broke up and at least half of them are dead. Some rapper hasn't taken their place. No one has forgotten the Beatles. U2 isn't the Beatles and they never have been, but no one is going to forget them. ever.

[Ibeanez]

Yes because they are totally NOT METAL and everything should be METAL because I'm an narrow minded prepubescent douchenozzle.

Calling someone a douchenozzle is not prepubescent, huh?

They write different, melodic music. You know, something that people who ARE NOT angry teenagers can listen to.

People who are not angry teenagers can also listen to the many dozens of bands that are much more interesting than U2.

[BlessedRebel15]

Ibeanez wrote:

Yes because they are totally NOT METAL and everything should be METAL because I'm an narrow minded prepubescent douchenozzle.

LOL...I personally love U2...my dad was into it when he was a teenager and theyre still around coming out with new stuff that we both like and I love that :p

[lead_zeppelin]

[Vince Sixx]

In these comments: Butthurt U2 fans and prepubescent bandwagoners.

[Hebriqui]

What we shouldn't forget is that even though he might not be such a great guitarist, The Edge is one prof with effects. That's the main reason he was in that DVD with Jimmy Page and James White. He has a fairly unique playing style.

[b_flo]

I'm laughing at these hater's comments. Yes, U2 take a simple approach, the "less is more" approach...and they admit it. They know what works for them. But for you hater's, you can't even get your band to even sound tight. I've been doing several battle of the bands for several years. Some have gone on to become successful. The bands that have won, have been tight...simple or complex. No train wrecks. We can usually tell within 10 seconds of a song. Two bands can be playing the same 3 chords, yet only one might be sounding better than the other. The difference between a garage/bar band playing 3 chords, and U2, is world's apart. That's what makes the difference. I've not heard one person in the live audio industry criticize them, after working with them. In fact, I've seen a lot of local crew members, that listen to different genres, gain respect for U2. It's rare that A-lister bands would go and see another band's concert. In U2's case, A-lister bands do go to see them. They even want to collaborate with them. That says a lot! Btw, if you hear the phrase "polishing turd" (common phrase in the music industry), while your band is playing, you need to practice more, instead of hating on other bands...especially the successful ones.

[oneDeej]

arnolddrummer wrote:

intothe wrote:

A shame, I didn't get to see them even though I wanted to, but I'm sure they'll be back in a while

You may have missed the title, which clearly states " U2 won't be back for a while"

...What, and you're actually going to trust an Ultimate Guitar title?

[biff022]

They need to close their career with a better effort than, well, everything since Zooropa. Some of their stuff in the past ten years is the most boring music I've ever heard. A parody of themselves when they were once pretty much the best around.

[Baconfish]

xwf wrote:

burghUK wrote:

too many hipsters and metalheads here , U2 are an excellent band and you hate them because they are mainstream. Admit it c*nts.

No, I hate them because they have made the same record over and over again for about 30 years now. They are garbage.

Which is a weird thing to say considering that the early 80s stuff sounds nothing like the late 80s stuff, neither does the 90s stuff nor the last album.

[smittyanthrax]

Does bono want the biddy?

[kayno86]

Baconfish wrote:

xwf wrote:

burghUK wrote:

too many hipsters and metalheads here , U2 are an excellent band and you hate them because they are mainstream. Admit it c*nts.

No, I hate them because they have made the same record over and over again for about 30 years now. They are garbage.
Which is a weird thing to say considering that the early 80s stuff sounds nothing like the late 80s stuff, neither does the 90s stuff nor the last album.

I do not like U2 but they do deserve credit for having the mettle to change. They have done that quite a few times in their career, and that's what good bands do.
Still don't like them though

[False_God]

yes U2 are so shìt, selling out shows for the past 25 years is proof that they are just that.....

I'm not into these guys, but at least I can appreciate what they do and more so what they have done.

[slashermaster]

whats up with this guy's vocab, "whilst" and dissmissed"

[dweb23]

dont like these guys but boy they deserve a break.

[almostlike/]

jimmy-moto wrote:

Has anyone else seen "It Might Get Loud" and laughed at The Edge when he was trying to play something other than simple chords loaded with effects?

Yeah. I've watched It Might Get Loud. Biggest fan of Jack White, Jimmy Page and The Edge. Don't really understand your comment. I mean, The Edge doesn't play mind-blowing guitar solos but that's not what music is all about. In the movie, if you recall, he called himself a "sound architect". That's exactly what he is. He doesn't need to show off for us to know his work is there.

[Horsedick.MPEG]

xwf wrote:

burghUK wrote:

too many hipsters and metalheads here , U2 are an excellent band and you hate them because they are mainstream. Admit it c*nts.

No, I hate them because they have made the same record over and over again for about 30 years now. They are garbage.

So does Slayer and everyone loves them

[Salvo416]

Baconfish wrote:

xwf wrote:

burghUK wrote:

too many hipsters and metalheads here , U2 are an excellent band and you hate them because they are mainstream. Admit it c*nts.

No, I hate them because they have made the same record over and over again for about 30 years now. They are garbage.
Which is a weird thing to say considering that the early 80s stuff sounds nothing like the late 80s stuff, neither does the 90s stuff nor the last album.

Seriously.. listen to Pop and then listen to The Joshua Tree.. How about War and Zooropa? Nothing alike about those comparisons.

[jetwash69]

burghUK wrote:
too many hipsters and metalheads here , U2 are an excellent band and you hate them because they are mainstream. Admit it c*nts.

I found them annoying in high school back when they were originally getting overplayed. And I like plenty of mainstream stuff like Zeplin, Rush, and Muse. I like a lot of "hipster" stuff like Captain Beefheart, The Kills, etc., too. Lots of metal is OK by me to, from 'Maiden to Metallica with room for A7X and Lamb of God. Punk from the Clash to the Butt Trumpets works for me and I even like some Bangles and some Madonna.

Yet other than a very few songs, U2 just rubs me the wrong way. It seems like it's not just hipsters and metal heads that object to some of U2's attributes. Check out Winnebego Man at 1:17:38. Noel: "He went a little Bono on us". His name has become an American metaphor for leveraging fame to prosilitize political views.

I realize if I don't like U2 then I don't have to go to their show--and I didn't--and I wouldn't have even if it were a free show. I also realize burghUK has the right to like them. I'm glad he/she gets enjoyment from them.

Whether burghUK likes it or not, we have an equal right not to like U2 and that doesn't make us hipsters or metalheads or necessarily have anything to do with them being mainstream.

I'm just thankful they don't get much radio play where I live anymore--even when they were in town.

[Horsedick.MPEG]

jetwash69 wrote:

burghUK wrote:
too many hipsters and metalheads here , U2 are an excellent band and you hate them because they are mainstream. Admit it c*nts.

I found them annoying in high school back when they were originally getting overplayed. And I like plenty of mainstream stuff like Zeplin, Rush, and Muse. I like a lot of "hipster" stuff like Captain Beefheart, The Kills, etc., too. Lots of metal is OK by me to, from 'Maiden to Metallica with room for A7X and Lamb of God. Punk from the Clash to the Butt Trumpets works for me and I even like some Bangles and some Madonna.

Yet other than a very few songs, U2 just rubs me the wrong way. It seems like it's not just hipsters and metal heads that object to some of U2's attributes. Check out Winnebego Man at 1:17:38. Noel: "He went a little Bono on us". His name has become an American metaphor for leveraging fame to prosilitize political views.

I realize if I don't like U2 then I don't have to go to their show--and I didn't--and I wouldn't have even if it were a free show. I also realize burghUK has the right to like them. I'm glad he/she gets enjoyment from them.

Whether burghUK likes it or not, we have an equal right not to like U2 and that doesn't make us hipsters or metalheads or necessarily have anything to do with them being mainstream.

I'm just thankful they don't get much radio play where I live anymore--even when they were in town.

I love when people type 5 paragraphs declaring why their opinion is absolute.

[Shazazmic]

Horsedick.MPEG wrote:
I love when people type 5 paragraphs declaring why their opinion is absolute.

Especially when they include every band they listen to to prove that their music tastes are extremely diverse and unbiased.

[vanillasky]

No, I hate them because they have made the same record over and over again for about 30 years now.

I don't think you need to have a degree in music to know that they have had some very diverse sounds. From their early post-punk days to the ambient, Eno era to their experimentation in the 1990s to the less-than-desirable pop they've made for the past ten years. You've just proven that your U2 experience consists of "With or Without You," "Beautiful Day," and other assorted hits.

[Tsunami3000]

all i ask for is the edge to do solo stuff, or im a dumbass for not looking any of his solo stuff if he has, cause i think hes the only good thing from U2

[ashowe]

MoreGilmourII wrote:

Inb4 a bunch of 15yr old tweens bash U2 for no real reason.

''hurr durr Bono douchebag durr durr can't sing hurpa lurp durpy doo''

How about THIS for a real reason? U2 have built an empire of music on making the same album every single time they put out new material. Honestly, the singles from every album they've made since Achtung Baby could be sequnced, and you'd never know where one track ends and another begins. To vanillasky, I understand that you want to defend this band's artistic integrity to someone who probably only knows the singles, but don't forget that this is also a band synonymous with the Ipod. These guys do the same thing Tool do - rewrite something that actually was groundbreaking and innovative at one point. Lots of bands can be pioneers of a sound, but not many can keep blazing new trails. I'll stick to my Radiohead and Deftones records, thank you.

[OxMxGxTACOS]

This is very happy news...

[maowcat]

burghUK wrote:

too many hipsters and metalheads here , U2 are an excellent band and you hate them because they are mainstream. Admit it c*nts.

No i hate them because of their repetitive boring music, ignorant ****.

[slaveskinJACKET]

burghUK wrote:

too many hipsters and metalheads here , U2 are an excellent band and you hate them because they are mainstream. Admit it c*nts.

Sorry to let you down, but I dislike U2 because they suck, their music sucks, their musicianship sucks, and they seem like giant twats... Bono and the Edge, at least -- the other two don't get much attention.

jimmy-moto wrote:

Has anyone else seen "It Might Get Loud" and laughed at The Edge when he was trying to play something other than simple chords loaded with effects?

Me.

But what was even better was when he seemed offended when Jimmy Page kept improving what the Edge brought into their jam session. And then he kept trying to correct him like, "No, it goes like this."

That was hilarious.

I would be embarrassed to be the Edge for his ability and for his repertoire, but definitely not for his success.

[slaveskinJACKET]

CaliforniaKid wrote:

i_am_metalhead wrote:

We can only hope that this is a permanent break...

Yes because they are totally NOT METAL and everything should be METAL because I'm an narrow minded prepubescent douchenozzle.

Might as well have typed, "Haters gon' hate."

It wouldn't have made you sound like less of a pretentious douchebag.

Vince Sixx wrote:

In these comments: Butthurt U2 fans and prepubescent bandwagoners.

I am neither.

Horsedick.MPEG wrote:

xwf wrote:

No, I hate them because they have made the same record over and over again for about 30 years now. They are garbage.

So does Slayer and everyone loves them

Slayer is also garbage.

jetwash69 wrote:

...Punk from the Clash...

What? They were just a 70's rockabilly band, although that's basically what punk is a more aggressive version of, at its roots.

However, The Clash is much more akin to Buddy Holly than to The Misfits, The Sex Pistols, Black Flag, The Stooges, etc.

[Horsedick.MPEG]

slaveskinJACKET wrote:

Vince Sixx wrote:

In these comments: Butthurt U2 fans and prepubescent bandwagoners.

I am neither.

yes you are

[SherlockHolmess]

Glad to hear it, terrible band

[kitaubila66]

metal sucks ass

[Ghost_Dancer]

The break is probably so Bono can go and bitch about how we're not doing enough to feed the starving childern in Africa. I'm sorry, Bono, I work two lousy minimum wage jobs to feed myself. I'm sure you could spare a couple 100,000 for me?

[jetwash69]

slaveskinJACKET wrote:
jetwash69 wrote:
...Punk from the Clash...
What? They were just a 70's rockabilly band, although that's basically what punk is a more aggressive version of, at its roots.
However, The Clash is much more akin to Buddy Holly than to The Misfits, The Sex Pistols, Black Flag, The Stooges, etc.

Cool story, bro.

I don't find the Clash in the rockabilly section of the vintage record stores; rather in the punk or rock sections. Since some (or at least one) of them sported mohawks from time to time, I'm going with punk. BTW, while there's some rockabilly in there, there's also a lot of reggae and other influences too. BTW, I think most would agree that psycho-billy and hell-billy are subgenres of punk and there was a punk community within post 50s rockabilly, e.g., The Stray Cats, etc. Perhaps you were confusing the Clash with them.

Anyway, that's all off point. I was just using them as an example of a mainstream band that coexisted with U2, from the region, that I happen to like. Because although U2 fanboys are in denial, there are plenty of valid reasons not to like U2 other than being a hipster or a metalhead.

BTW, your example of "the Edge's" conduct in It Might Get loud is classic.

I don't understand why you want to quibble over irelevant points with folks on your side of the basic argument.

[jetwash69]

Horsedick.MPEG wrote:

jetwash69 wrote:
...I also realize burghUK has the right to like the. I'm glad he/she gets enjoyment from them...

I love when people type 5 paragraphs declaring why their opinion is absolute.

Cool story, bro.

Shame you focused on paragraph counts instead of the point. The excerpt above pretty much pre-empted your point.

Or do you disagree with my point that we're all entitled to our opinions?

[Horsedick.MPEG]

jetwash69 wrote:

Horsedick.MPEG wrote:

jetwash69 wrote:
...I also realize burghUK has the right to like the. I'm glad he/she gets enjoyment from them...

I love when people type 5 paragraphs declaring why their opinion is absolute.
Cool story, bro.

Shame you focused on paragraph counts instead of the point. The excerpt above pretty much pre-empted your point.

Or do you disagree with my point that we're all entitled to our opinions?

No, I focused on your content, you're making illegitimate points and non-analogous points on why we should give a f*ck why you hate this band, then bragged about your "diverse" taste in music. Anyone who types multiple paragraphs about why you should hate something shows you have nothing to prove.

[jetwash69]

Shazazmic Especially when they include every band they listen to to prove that their music tastes are extremely diverse and unbiased.

Cool story, bro.

Cause like everyone else here, I only listen to 13 bands.

Of course, I have biases just like anyone, and even though I don't like U2 in general, I still like a few of their songs.

My posts don't proven anything; they don't intend to. But if you saw my CD collection, I doubt you'd find it anything but ecclectic. It's got mainstream, off the wall, rap, local stuff, and includes native music from the far east, the middle east, and the midwest. I don't have every subgenre covered, and it's a pretty humble collection considering I started buying them about 5 years after the format hit the market. But it covers stuff written hundreds of years ago up to stuff released this year. But sorry, no U2 CDs, just a few of their songs on soundtracks.

Definitely more than 13 bands, and it seems to fit Webster's definition of ecclectic. At least better than the definitions for hipster or metalhead.

Once again, you're entitled to your opinion, even if it amounts to "tl;dr".

[jetwash69]

Horsedick.MPEG wrote:

jetwash69 wrote:

Horsedick.MPEG wrote:

jetwash69 wrote:
...I also realize burghUK has the right to like the. I'm glad he/she gets enjoyment from them...

I love when people type 5 paragraphs declaring why their opinion is absolute.
Cool story, bro.

Shame you focused on paragraph counts instead of the point. The excerpt above pretty much pre-empted your point.

Or do you disagree with my point that we're all entitled to our opinions?


No, I focused on your content, you're making illegitimate points and non-analogous points on why we should give a f*ck why you hate this band, then bragged about your "diverse" taste in music. Anyone who types multiple paragraphs about why you should hate something shows you have nothing to prove.

[Co Cor]

slaveskinJACKET wrote:

burghUK wrote:

too many hipsters and metalheads here , U2 are an excellent band and you hate them because they are mainstream. Admit it c*nts.


Sorry to let you down, but I dislike U2 because they suck, their music sucks, their musicianship sucks, and they seem like giant twats... Bono and the Edge, at least -- the other two don't get much attention.


jimmy-moto wrote:

Has anyone else seen "It Might Get Loud" and laughed at The Edge when he was trying to play something other than simple chords loaded with effects?



Me.

But what was even better was when he seemed offended when Jimmy Page kept improving what the Edge brought into their jam session. And then he kept trying to correct him like, "No, it goes like this."

That was hilarious.

I would be embarrassed to be the Edge for his ability and for his repertoire, but definitely not for his success.

Haha. The Edge seemed out of place in that movie.

[jetwash69]

Horsedick.MPEG wrote:

jetwash69 wrote:

Horsedick.MPEG wrote:

jetwash69 wrote:
No, I focused on your content, you're making illegitimate points and non-analogous points on why we should give a f*ck why you hate this band, then bragged about your "diverse" taste in music. Anyone who types multiple paragraphs about why you should hate something shows you have nothing to prove.

They call this the straw man argument.
A. I don't care what people think of my opinion of U2, just wanted to register a vote against U2 and buck the misconception that only hipsters or metalheads could think that way
B. I don't hate this band; just don't particularly like them. Hate is a pretty strong word, which I'd have to reserve for Cold Play and Crosby Stills and Nash.
C. Not bragging about anything, just providing a tiny representative sample to support the point that I'm not a hipster or a metalhead. Or a "15 year old tweenager" [sic] for that matter.

At least you're right that I have nothing to prove.

Tell us another.

[Horsedick.MPEG]

jetwash69 wrote:

Horsedick.MPEG wrote:

jetwash69 wrote:

Horsedick.MPEG wrote:

jetwash69 wrote:
No, I focused on your content, you're making illegitimate points and non-analogous points on why we should give a f*ck why you hate this band, then bragged about your "diverse" taste in music. Anyone who types multiple paragraphs about why you should hate something shows you have nothing to prove.
They call this the straw man argument.
A. I don't care what people think of my opinion of U2, just wanted to register a vote against U2 and buck the misconception that only hipsters or metalheads could think that way
B. I don't hate this band; just don't particularly like them. Hate is a pretty strong word, which I'd have to reserve for Cold Play and Crosby Stills and Nash.
C. Not bragging about anything, just providing a tiny representative sample to support the point that I'm not a hipster or a metalhead. Or a "15 year old tweenager" [sic] for that matter.

At least you're right that I have nothing to prove.

Tell us another.

Lol, impress me more. I refuted what you've been saying. Plus you're not impressing anyone with multiple paragraphs on why we should agree with your disgust of U2, I'm not sure who you're trying to impress with your lengthy bitchfest. You fit your A. post, it shows you're trying too hard that you went to the length of not only creating a lengthy post, you had to go out and beyond by posting your "diverse" bands". By posting multiple paragraphs to pretend that your point actually matters shows you actually don't have a point, which refers back to your A. point that you're a crybaby hipster and/or a metalhead.

[JGuitarC]

I feel sorry for everyone here who's completely bashing U2. You're all fools.

If you say you hate U2, you've never seen them live. And if you've seen U2 live, you'll never hate them.

No one else puts on a show with an experience like that, and I can't see anyone come close. Sucks for you if you missed out, but don't say they're the worst band ever, you obviously have no idea what you're talking about.

[jetwash69]

Horsedick.MPEG wrote:

Lol, impress me more. I refuted what you've been saying. Plus you're not impressing anyone with multiple paragraphs on why we should agree with your disgust of U2, I'm not sure who you're trying to impress with your lengthy bitchfest. You fit your A. post, it shows you're trying too hard that you went to the length of not only creating a lengthy post, you had to go out and beyond by posting your "diverse" bands". By posting multiple paragraphs to pretend that your point actually matters shows you actually don't have a point, which refers back to your A. point that you're a crybaby hipster and/or a metalhead.

Well, as long as you ignore what I actually say, then I guess you'll never get it. Best wishes.

[austinm82]

Saw them in July in St Louis...awesome show. Better than most.

[Cazman]

U2 are ****ing boring.

[kurtshapedbox]

The people making fun of the people making fun of U2, look just as silly as the people their making fun of.
har har

[RP75]

Hooray!!! Best news in ages!!! Don't come back. Ha ha!!!!

[austinm82]

I completely agree...I've seen a lot of great conerts in my day, and UE completely blew them all away. You U2 haters need to give them a listen.

[austinm82]

U2

[austinm82]

Watch U2 ZooTV in Sydney and tell me they're garbage.

[austinm82]

Edge owns.

[Cazman]

Doesn't matter if they play a good live show if the songs are shit.

[PR Forever19]

I will not survive at this news... I love you Bono..

[psykopoo]

Thank **** for that.

[Ardolino_Cool]

I am no hipster. Nor am I a metal head, however I am glad we are not going to see U2 for a while. They get everywhere and their music is mediocre at best. Their sound is generic..they are like Coldplay. Their music is so generic it appeals to everyone and the only people that love them, won't understand music and its forms fully. Lyrics uninspiring/instrument virtuosity non/song writing forms basic pop forms. Therefore nothing exciting to me.

[johnsz]

I don't get how people can bash and say that U2 sucks when they are the most successful band of the past 30 years? And sell out the biggest crowds consistently?

[almostlike/]

Gosh. Shut the **** up already! So you are hipster/metalhead/people-who-think-they-know-what-real-music -is... No one gives a damn shit. Stop bashing them and go listen to whatever you like to. Again, no one gives a shit.

[SchecterDean]

Can't stand U2

[Escape.Artist90]

Basti95 wrote:

"Bashing U2 for no real reason"

They suck, that's reason enough right...?

Yes sir!

[mickallica]

jetwash69 :
Shazazmic Especially when they include every band they listen to to prove that their music tastes are extremely diverse and unbiased.


Cool story, bro.

Cause like everyone else here, I only listen to 13 bands.

Of course, I have biases just like anyone, and even though I don't like U2 in general, I still like a few of their songs.

My posts don't proven anything; they don't intend to. But if you saw my CD collection, I doubt you'd find it anything but ecclectic. It's got mainstream, off the wall, rap, local stuff, and includes native music from the far east, the middle east, and the midwest. I don't have every subgenre covered, and it's a pretty humble collection considering I started buying them about 5 years after the format hit the market. But it covers stuff written hundreds of years ago up to stuff released this year. But sorry, no U2 CDs, just a few of their songs on soundtracks.

Definitely more than 13 bands, and it seems to fit Webster's definition of ecclectic. At least better than the definitions for hipster or metalhead.

Once again, you're entitled to your opinion, even if it amounts to "tl;dr".
Nobody Gives a s***

[jetwash69]

almostlike/ wrote:

Gosh. Shut the **** up already! So you are hipster/metalhead/people-who-think-they-know-what-real-music -is... No one gives a damn shit. Stop bashing them and go listen to whatever you like to. Again, no one gives a shit.

Don't give **** so much you feel compelled to post more about it. $5 says you're a Fall Out Boy fanboy too.

This is why it's so much fun to post anything other than fanboyisms in a U2 comment section. The fanboys just can't let it go.

So here's some more gasoline:

johnsz wrote:
I don't get how people can bash and say that U2 sucks when they are the most successful band of the past 30 years? And sell out the biggest crowds consistently?

McDonals may be the most successful fast food chain in the past 30 years, and although I may like their french fries, I still have to admit that their food sucks overall--particularly from a health standpoint if you eat it a lot.

Just becuase something is extremely popular doesn't necessarily mean it's good. Or that someone is flawed if they don't like it.

This is all about U2 fanboys' intolerance to ideas other than their own.

So what if someone thinks your favorite band sucks? Why do you feel compelled to convince us they don't suck?

Half the people ragging on U2 here don't even care at all, it's just fun watching the reaction.

And if you don't "...Gives a s***" then why are you posting about it and overcapitalizing?

[mark3777]

Does no one else think Vertigo is an amazing song?? I mean U2 is responsible for post-rock.

[guitarmaniac88]

Horsedick.MPEG wrote:

jetwash69 wrote:

Horsedick.MPEG wrote:

jetwash69 wrote:

Horsedick.MPEG wrote:

jetwash69 wrote:
No, I focused on your content, you're making illegitimate points and non-analogous points on why we should give a f*ck why you hate this band, then bragged about your "diverse" taste in music. Anyone who types multiple paragraphs about why you should hate something shows you have nothing to prove.
They call this the straw man argument.
A. I don't care what people think of my opinion of U2, just wanted to register a vote against U2 and buck the misconception that only hipsters or metalheads could think that way
B. I don't hate this band; just don't particularly like them. Hate is a pretty strong word, which I'd have to reserve for Cold Play and Crosby Stills and Nash.
C. Not bragging about anything, just providing a tiny representative sample to support the point that I'm not a hipster or a metalhead. Or a "15 year old tweenager" [sic] for that matter.

At least you're right that I have nothing to prove.

Tell us another.

Lol, impress me more. I refuted what you've been saying. Plus you're not impressing anyone with multiple paragraphs on why we should agree with your disgust of U2, I'm not sure who you're trying to impress with your lengthy bitchfest. You fit your A. post, it shows you're trying too hard that you went to the length of not only creating a lengthy post, you had to go out and beyond by posting your "diverse" bands". By posting multiple paragraphs to pretend that your point actually matters shows you actually don't have a point, which refers back to your A. point that you're a crybaby hipster and/or a metalhead.

I'm wondering who you're trying to impress, actually. Your argument hasn't changed since you started. He proved he wasn't a "hipster" or "metalhead", and that was his point.

BTW, how does pretending your point matters show you don't have a point? That statement is completely retarded, unsurprisingly.

I don't like U2 either. Does that make me a hipster or metalhead? No, which is the same thing jetwash said. I listen to a lot of underground type stuff of many genres. You can ask anyone who personally knows me, I listen to bands very few people have heard of, but they don't deny that it's good music. Mine and jetwash's point is that just because you don't like a terrible band doesn't mean you are a "crybaby hipster" or a "metalhead".

[Priad-Luabe]

hope this break leads to a better album than no line on the horizon - that was piss poor.

[Horsedick.MPEG]

guitarmaniac88 wrote:

Horsedick.MPEG wrote:

jetwash69 wrote:

Horsedick.MPEG wrote:

jetwash69 wrote:

Horsedick.MPEG wrote:

jetwash69 wrote:
No, I focused on your content, you're making illegitimate points and non-analogous points on why we should give a f*ck why you hate this band, then bragged about your "diverse" taste in music. Anyone who types multiple paragraphs about why you should hate something shows you have nothing to prove.
They call this the straw man argument.
A. I don't care what people think of my opinion of U2, just wanted to register a vote against U2 and buck the misconception that only hipsters or metalheads could think that way
B. I don't hate this band; just don't particularly like them. Hate is a pretty strong word, which I'd have to reserve for Cold Play and Crosby Stills and Nash.
C. Not bragging about anything, just providing a tiny representative sample to support the point that I'm not a hipster or a metalhead. Or a "15 year old tweenager" [sic] for that matter.

At least you're right that I have nothing to prove.

Tell us another.

Lol, impress me more. I refuted what you've been saying. Plus you're not impressing anyone with multiple paragraphs on why we should agree with your disgust of U2, I'm not sure who you're trying to impress with your lengthy bitchfest. You fit your A. post, it shows you're trying too hard that you went to the length of not only creating a lengthy post, you had to go out and beyond by posting your "diverse" bands". By posting multiple paragraphs to pretend that your point actually matters shows you actually don't have a point, which refers back to your A. point that you're a crybaby hipster and/or a metalhead.

I'm wondering who you're trying to impress, actually. Your argument hasn't changed since you started. He proved he wasn't a "hipster" or "metalhead", and that was his point.

BTW, how does pretending your point matters show you don't have a point? That statement is completely retarded, unsurprisingly.

I don't like U2 either. Does that make me a hipster or metalhead? No, which is the same thing jetwash said. I listen to a lot of underground type stuff of many genres. You can ask anyone who personally knows me, I listen to bands very few people have heard of, but they don't deny that it's good music. Mine and jetwash's point is that just because you don't like a terrible band doesn't mean you are a "crybaby hipster" or a "metalhead".

His point was that he's trying to hard explaining why he thinks the band is terrible. Anyone who has to write multiple paragraphs about his/her opinion on why we should listen to him doesn't know what the f*ck he's talking about.

[Motorhed95]

burghUK :
too many hipsters and metalheads here , U2 are an excellent band and you hate them because they are mainstream. Admit it c*nts.

No, we hate it cuz Bono is a self obsessed old man who never shuts the hell up.

[Krieger91]

I find it funny how in this comment page, the U2 fans seem to be even more on their high horse than the metalhead they are trying to insult: "lol, u don't like U2 'cause you're a prebuscent metalhead who only likes metal, I am better than that because I listen to U2.."
No problem with U2, I am neither a fan nor a metalhead, I like what I like, unfortunately U2 just bore me, simple as that. But boy the fans on here are trying to narrow it down to one stereotype..

[jetwash69]

Horsedick.MPEG wrote:

His point was that he's trying to hard explaining why he thinks the band is terrible. Anyone who has to write multiple paragraphs about his/her opinion on why we should listen to him doesn't know what the f*ck he's talking about.

A. My point clearly isn't that I'm "...trying to hard explaining why he [I] thinks the band is terrible"
A.1. I don't think U2 are terrible, and...
A.2. Despite liking a few of their songs, I generally don't like the band. I never said they're terrible. And I clearly don't hate them.
B. I wrote zero paragraphs on why anyone should listen to me, much less multiple paragraphs.
C. Nothing I write or don't write here (or anywhere), nor how much I were to write or not write, would have a direct correlation to whether I know what the **** I'm talking about (or not).

Incidentally, I'm sorry if you think it's pretentious, but I still believe that reading is good, and 5 paragraphs to cover a point is pretty concise compared to the hundreds of articles you could read on a topic, much less the thousands of pages in dozens of books.

So if that's the only way you can justify arguing with me, HD.mpeg, then by all means, please continue misrepresenting my points.

By your username alone, we can see who is more likely to be trying to impress someone here. Wow, lot's of material there, but I deleted it before posting because there's no need to make this personal. Besides, I'm the one preaching tolerance here, so I really ought to practice what I'm preaching.

[xmdsx2]

JGuitarC wrote:

I feel sorry for everyone here who's completely bashing U2. You're all fools.

If you say you hate U2, you've never seen them live. And if you've seen U2 live, you'll never hate them.

No one else puts on a show with an experience like that, and I can't see anyone come close. Sucks for you if you missed out, but don't say they're the worst band ever, you obviously have no idea what you're talking about.

So you've never been to a Pink Floyd concert?

[jetwash69]

[motorizer]

How bout forever ..

[stiklyman]

So...how 'bout them Packers?

[Footallica?]

Bono can't sing anymore. His voice used to be great, but it isn't now. Get over it.

[G&L18]

Footallica? wrote:

Bono can't sing anymore. His voice used to be great, but it isn't now. Get over it.

Mte. Bono used to have a powerful, passionate voice. Sometime in the 90s though it started to fade and now it's just so weak and whiney, I really cringe when he tries to sing their older songs live. Kind of sad that it's gotten to the point where the Edge is probably a better singer

[b_flo]

I'm laughing at these hater's comments. Yes, U2 take a simple approach, the "less is more" approach...and they admit it. They know what works for them. But for you hater's, you can't even get your band to even sound tight. I've been doing several battle of the bands for several years. Some have gone on to become successful. The bands that have won, have been tight...simple or complex. No train wrecks. We can usually tell within 10 seconds of a song. Two bands can be playing the same 3 chords, yet only one might be sounding better than the other. The difference between a garage/bar band playing 3 chords, and U2, is world's apart. That's what makes the difference. I've not heard one person in the live audio industry criticize them, after working with them. In fact, I've seen a lot of local crew members, that listen to different genres, gain respect for U2. It's rare that A/B and C -lister bands would go and see another band's concert. In U2's case, A/B and C -lister bands do go to see them. They even want to collaborate with them. That says a lot! Btw, if you hear the phrase "polishing turd" (common phrase in the music industry), while your band is playing, you need to practice more, instead of hating on other bands...especially the successful ones.

[jetwash69]

Hey b_flo...big surprise to find you at a U2 article :. Good to see you again.

Last time I read one of your posts I recall it saying something about Muse not being good enough to headline their own shows.

BTW, here's Muse's gig history if anyone still thinks Muse has had problems headlining anywhere in the last 5 years:
[url]http://www.songkick.com/artists/219230-m... y?page=1[/url]

Did you ever get a chance to see Muse live as the main act with their full sets? Just curious about your professional opinion if you did after your time with them opening for U2.

[/OOM]

U2 are over rated, and in Ireland, where they are from, are just considered an absolute joke. To everyone claiming they are brilliant musicians, did ye know that The Edge writes all the basslines in every song, and records 90% of them. What does that tell you about the bassist? I know a session player who has jammed with them and said it was appalling how poorly they kept it together. I'm sure they were a pretty good band once, but those days are gone and they should give it a rest now, I think. But to each their own!

[slaveskinJACKET]

Horsedick.MPEG wrote:

slaveskinJACKET wrote:

Vince Sixx wrote:

In these comments: Butthurt U2 fans and prepubescent bandwagoners.

I am neither.

yes you are

1. I am by no means a U2 fan.
2. The term 'prepubescent' would imply that I have not yet even reached puberty, let alone be done with it. You can come check, if you want to.
3. The term ' bandwagoner' would imply that my opinion is solely an extension of another's. That is also untrue. My opinion is completely independent of anyone else's, and no one else will be able to influence my opinion one way or the other. I've always disliked U2, and I always will.

I don't know why I'm bothering to explain this to you. You've already proven that you're extremely immature and that your reading comprehension skills are lacking, at best.

jetwash69 wrote:

I don't find the Clash in the rockabilly section of the vintage record stores; rather in the punk or rock sections. Since some (or at least one) of them sported mohawks from time to time, I'm going with punk. BTW, while there's some rockabilly in there, there's also a lot of reggae and other influences too. BTW, I think most would agree that psycho-billy and hell-billy are subgenres of punk and there was a punk community within post 50s rockabilly, e.g., The Stray Cats, etc. Perhaps you were confusing the Clash with them.

Anyway, that's all off point. I was just using them as an example of a mainstream band that coexisted with U2, from the region, that I happen to like. Because although U2 fanboys are in denial, there are plenty of valid reasons not to like U2 other than being a hipster or a metalhead.

BTW, your example of "the Edge's" conduct in It Might Get loud is classic.

I don't understand why you want to quibble over irelevant points with folks on your side of the basic argument.

Sorry. I mostly agree. I've just never thought of The Clash as a punk band. I know they're categorized as one, but Taylor Swift and Rascall Flatts, for example, get categorized as country, for some reason (although that makes much less sense to me than calling The Clash punk).

My point is that, if the Sci-Fi channel suddenly began playing A Walk to Remember , A Fistful of Dollars , and Dazed and Confused , that wouldn't make them science fiction, although the same thing happens with 'country' music these days, and, aside from traditionalists, it's generally accepted by the majority of the population. That's kind of the same way I view The Clash as a punk band, except that I can actually see how they could be thought of as a punk.

[jetwash69]

slaveskinJACKET wrote:Sorry. I mostly agree. I've just never thought of The Clash as a punk band. I know they're categorized as one, but Taylor Swift and Rascall Flatts, for example, get categorized as country, for some reason (although that makes much less sense to me than calling The Clash punk).

My point is that, if the Sci-Fi channel suddenly began playing A Walk to Remember, A Fistful of Dollars, and Dazed and Confused, that wouldn't make them science fiction, although the same thing happens with 'country' music these days, and, aside from traditionalists, it's generally accepted by the majority of the population. That's kind of the same way I view The Clash as a punk band, except that I can actually see how they could be thought of as a punk.

No problem. You make some great points about how arbitrary categorizations can be. I'm not familiar enough w/Taylor Swift or Rascall Flatts to really get on board with that, but I'll take your word for it.

Kinda like when the modern rock stations used to play Outkast's Hey Ya in their regular rotations; that certainly didn't make it modern rock. Catchy tune, but not rock.

Punk is a really broad genre, and you're right, rockabilly was a huge chunk of it's origin. Check out the Clash's full catelog (or even their greatest hits) and you'll find other songs rooted in ska, reggae, funk--even dance and rap. They ran in the same circles as the Sex Pistols and the Ramones back in the early days, but clearly they were nowhere near as offensive as the Sex Pistols, but they certainly shook the political status quo with songs like "Know Your Rights" and "The Guns of Brixton".

Take care, and happy fanboy sniping!

[b_flo]

jetwash69 wrote:

Hey b_flo...big surprise to find you at a U2 article :. Good to see you again.

Last time I read one of your posts I recall it saying something about Muse not being good enough to headline their own shows.

BTW, here's Muse's gig history if anyone still thinks Muse has had problems headlining anywhere in the last 5 years:
[url]http://www.songkick.com/artists/219230-m... y?page=1[/url]

Did you ever get a chance to see Muse live as the main act with their full sets? Just curious about your professional opinion if you did after your time with them opening for U2.

Really, me saying Muse not good enough to be headliners...sorry, you've got the wrong person. I've got all their albums. That's one of the best shows I've seen.

[b_flo]

/OOM wrote:

U2 are over rated, and in Ireland, where they are from, are just considered an absolute joke. To everyone claiming they are brilliant musicians, did ye know that The Edge writes all the basslines in every song, and records 90% of them. What does that tell you about the bassist? I know a session player who has jammed with them and said it was appalling how poorly they kept it together. I'm sure they were a pretty good band once, but those days are gone and they should give it a rest now, I think. But to each their own!

Please name your source. I'll check up on it.

[b_flo]

See, it's one thing on criticizing a band for their talents, but if you can't even get your band to play tight...then your opinions are moot. If a band plays solid together, but simple, they'll sound 1000 times better than a band that sounds like a train wreck...trying to be complex. Just playing a few bars together, will determine if you're band is legit.

[jetwash69]

b_flo wrote:
Really, me saying Muse not good enough to be headliners...sorry, you've got the wrong person. I've got all their albums. That's one of the best shows I've seen.

Sorry if I do have the wrong person. It was a long time ago, and whoever it was said a lot of the same stuff you said here but said that U2 "schooled" Muse on showmanship and that Muse's performance paled in comparison to U2's. Part of the ensuing Donnybrook that always happens in U2 article comments, involved that person somehow minimizing Muse's ability/clout to headline in the US. Maybe not a matter of how good they were, perhaps more a matter of US popularity.

There's probably other techs who talk about "nutbagging" mics if the band are jerks (that person had something in his profile like that too), but I don't remember him having all the cool stage photography you have in yours.

By the way, while I agree that it would be a better use of someone's time to hone their own skills than to criticize others', I think we're all entitled to our opinions about bands, even those who aren't musicians.

I think a lot of the U2 backlash comes from having the brand rammed down our throats in so many different vectors. Incessant radio play. Movie soundtracks. Talk shows. And all the "news" outlets advertising U2 under the guise of showcasing Mr. Bono's activism.

So yeah, either I got the wrong guy or at the very least I somewhat mis-paraphrased. Regardless, I apologize; neither were the intent.

[b_flo]

jetwash69 wrote:

b_flo wrote:
Really, me saying Muse not good enough to be headliners...sorry, you've got the wrong person. I've got all their albums. That's one of the best shows I've seen.
Sorry if I do have the wrong person. It was a long time ago, and whoever it was said a lot of the same stuff you said here but said that U2 "schooled" Muse on showmanship and that Muse's performance paled in comparison to U2's. Part of the ensuing Donnybrook that always happens in U2 article comments, involved that person somehow minimizing Muse's ability/clout to headline in the US. Maybe not a matter of how good they were, perhaps more a matter of US popularity.

There's probably other techs who talk about "nutbagging" mics if the band are jerks (that person had something in his profile like that too), but I don't remember him having all the cool stage photography you have in yours.

By the way, while I agree that it would be a better use of someone's time to hone their own skills than to criticize others', I think we're all entitled to our opinions about bands, even those who aren't musicians.

I think a lot of the U2 backlash comes from having the brand rammed down our throats in so many different vectors. Incessant radio play. Movie soundtracks. Talk shows. And all the "news" outlets advertising U2 under the guise of showcasing Mr. Bono's activism.

So yeah, either I got the wrong guy or at the very least I somewhat mis-paraphrased. Regardless, I apologize; neither were the intent.

No probs mate! I hear ya when you see any type of band being branded everywhere...especially being tied to major corporate sponsors. However, seeing the money trail, a lot of people are misguided on how bands earn a living. Yes, U2, and others of that caliber are tied to these major corporations. But, lesser exposed bands are also getting paid from the same companies. They're just not being showcased to that nature, until they make it to the next level. Bands, like Muse, have made it to the next level, yet have more haters than before...just human nature. It comes with the territory. Any band branded as #1 will always be scrutinized....you just have to get back to basics. Why does this band play better, live, than your average bar band? Why does this band sound solid? I've worked with several bands that I've listened to, yet walked away disappointed...then there's those that have proven themselves. There's bands that I've disliked in the past, but have admired them after watching them play live. Of course, there's a lot of local bands, I've worked with, that deserve more. But who knows what they'll do when they become an A/B or C lister band. A lot of haters, on here, just ramble on when they see the article...not having seen that band play live...just falling for all the negative media hype. The best sources are the ones in the biz. UG knows that they'll get a ton of replies when they do a U2 article. I've yet to see them try to expose artists that rip off their fans, by lip-syncing, being 100% track acts and just not giving a sh*t.

[CaliforniaKid]

slaveskinJACKET wrote:


1. I am by no means a U2 fan.
2. The term 'prepubescent' would imply that I have not yet even reached puberty, let alone be done with it. You can come check, if you want to.
3. The term ' bandwagoner' would imply that my opinion is solely an extension of another's. That is also untrue. My opinion is completely independent of anyone else's, and no one else will be able to influence my opinion one way or the other. I've always disliked U2, and I always will.

I don't know why I'm bothering to explain this to you. You've already proven that you're extremely immature and that your reading comprehension skills are lacking, at best.

Well genius, the term "prepubescent" does not IMPLY that you haven't reached puberty, its the DEFINITION of prepubescent. I don't know why I'm bothering to explain this to you. You've already proven that you're extremely immature and that your reading comprehension skills are lacking, at best.

[jetwash69]

This article is probably dead now, but just to set the record straight, going back to the old articles, I couldn't find b_flo saying that U2 schooled Muse, or that they weren't enough to headline. Here's part of the discussion about Muse headlining:

quote]fenwaypunk04 wrote:

b_flo wrote:

jetwash69....I don't know what your definition of pop music is, but it means 'popular' music...now to the world of metal, 'Ace of Spades' is a pop song...'Anarchy in the UK' is a pop song in the punk genre. U2 is a pop band in modern rock...and so is Slayer, in the realm of metal. I'm pretty sure I've worked w/a lot of bands you've listened to and it's no wonder that a lot of them admire U2 for their talent and live performance...yes, face the truth, your favorite bands listens to them too. Btw, America is falling behind in the music world. Muse headlines in Europe, but not in the U.S. (they opened up for My Chemical Romance in the U.S., but headlined in Europe)...and what do ya know...your friends, U2, are trying to get the Muse exposed more, here in the U.S. It's like when The Police (a pop band) passed the torch onto U2...now U2 can pass the torch to the Muse...that means that the Muse will become a pop band in the U.S.


I couldnt help but see some flaws in your post, like i've said before, they headlined in the US in 2007 w/ Cold War Kids as the opening act... and what really ticks me as that you constantly call them "The Muse". Maybe U2 isn't doing good enough to get their name out? Nope, it's the fact that you really shouldn't make comment on something you don't fully now. Muse is actually already well known to fans of music that have an open mind and dont only listen to music. And to add on, Muse has actually headlined all over the world in many different countries, as well as America.[/quote]

And here's the comments I was thinking about regarding U2 vs. Muse at the 360 tour date b_flo worked:

b_flo wrote:

Muse are one of my favorite bands, but kinda disappointed when they opened up for U2. Don't get me wrong, Muse played great, but their mix was not that great. The vocals kept on being drowned out, and the low mids were a little muddy...but still a great band though. Also, a lot of Muse fans, that came just to see Muse, were converted to U2 fans...they didn't know what hit them! Hope to see/work with both bands again.

So here's where I really owe b_flo the apology: I was mixing him up with this guy:

prelude222 wrote:

U2 are not touring with Muse, Muse is touring with U2. When Muse can headline a North American tour, then you can pay to see them.

Like I said in my earlier post, Muse fans, you didn't miss anything.

I can see Bellamy in the back every night going "ohhh shittt..." So thats how its done??

[b][quote]prelude222 wrote:

I just saw U2 with Muse at Giants Stadium. With 3 huge Muse fans. I'm sorry, but U2 mopped the floor with them. Muse had no emotion, excitement, nothing. Their songs rocked, but you could have [played the CD really loud and got the same effect.

I notice its cool on this site to bash U2, but they still do it better than anyone. Just because they're the most successful, doesn't mean they suck. Muse was boring and lifeless, and got a lesson by guys 15 years older than them.

Not that I expect anyone to care, but I just wanted to correct any inaccuracies.