Jump to content

Better Band?


SunnyDRE

U2 vs Radiohed  

41 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

For me, U2. While both have egomaniac frontmen I'd rather hang out with Bono than Thom Yorke. U2 also made Zooropa before Radiohead made OK Computer which means they actually did the alternative thing first.

These days, Radiohead could produce an album of nothing but static and their more rabid fans would still hail it as a masterpiece. I do like Radiohead, just not as much as people seem to think everybody should.

Edited by ADPT
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me U2. While both have egomaniac frontmen I'd rather hang out with Bono than Thom Yorke. U2 also made Zooropa before Radiohead made OK Computer which means they actually did the alternative thing first.

These days, Radiohead could produce an album of nothing but static and their more rabid fans would still hail it as a masterpiece. I do like Radiohead, just not as much as people seem to think everybody should.

Even though Zoorapa came before Ok Computer, you can't be saying it is better?

As for rabid Radiohead fans. I think U2 could make album after album of Joshua Tree type songs......and they would win Grammy after Grammy after Grammy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me U2. While both have egomaniac frontmen I'd rather hang out with Bono than Thom Yorke. U2 also made Zooropa before Radiohead made OK Computer which means they actually did the alternative thing first.

These days, Radiohead could produce an album of nothing but static and their more rabid fans would still hail it as a masterpiece. I do like Radiohead, just not as much as people seem to think everybody should.

Even though Zoorapa came before Ok Computer, you can't be saying it is better?

As for rabid Radiohead fans. I think U2 could make album after album of Joshua Tree type songs......and they would win Grammy after Grammy after Grammy.

I'm not saying it's a better album but it was experimental. It even had an MC 900Ft Jesus sample on there. That's about as big a break from Joshua Tree as you can get. I just think they never really get any credit for it or for pushing themselves and everyone acted like it had never been done before with OK Computer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me U2. While both have egomaniac frontmen I'd rather hang out with Bono than Thom Yorke. U2 also made Zooropa before Radiohead made OK Computer which means they actually did the alternative thing first.

These days, Radiohead could produce an album of nothing but static and their more rabid fans would still hail it as a masterpiece. I do like Radiohead, just not as much as people seem to think everybody should.

Even though Zoorapa came before Ok Computer, you can't be saying it is better?

As for rabid Radiohead fans. I think U2 could make album after album of Joshua Tree type songs......and they would win Grammy after Grammy after Grammy.

I'm not saying it's a better album but it was experimental. It even had an MC 900Ft Jesus sample on there. That's about as big a break from Joshua Tree as you can get. I just think they never really get any credit for it or for pushing themselves and everyone acted like it had never been done before with OK Computer.

I think they got plenty of credit for it. It won a Grammy for best alternative album and if I believe right it was nominated for "Record of the Year" that particular year.

If you want to talk about an album not getting credit....lets talk about "Pop", easily one of the most overlooked releases by U2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Radiohead... even though U2 are a great surviving rock band (surviving in the fact that they're still making some of their best music today after 20 years; Beautiful Day, Elevation, Stuck in a moment you can't get out of, Sometimes You can't Make it on your own, Window in the Skies etc.) But radiohead's songs I just find more tangible where as U2 have a lot of boring, generic non sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me U2. While both have egomaniac frontmen I'd rather hang out with Bono than Thom Yorke. U2 also made Zooropa before Radiohead made OK Computer which means they actually did the alternative thing first.

These days, Radiohead could produce an album of nothing but static and their more rabid fans would still hail it as a masterpiece. I do like Radiohead, just not as much as people seem to think everybody should.

Even though Zoorapa came before Ok Computer, you can't be saying it is better?

As for rabid Radiohead fans. I think U2 could make album after album of Joshua Tree type songs......and they would win Grammy after Grammy after Grammy.

I'm not saying it's a better album but it was experimental. It even had an MC 900Ft Jesus sample on there. That's about as big a break from Joshua Tree as you can get. I just think they never really get any credit for it or for pushing themselves and everyone acted like it had never been done before with OK Computer.

I think they got plenty of credit for it. It won a Grammy for best alternative album and if I believe right it was nominated for "Record of the Year" that particular year.

If you want to talk about an album not getting credit....lets talk about "Pop", easily one of the most overlooked releases by U2.

I didn't mean in terms of awards, I meant just in general. I can't remember reading too much about Zooropa or seeing critics wax lyrical about it.

I agree with you on Pop. I think it's one of their best albums.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Radiohead... even though U2 are a great surviving rock band (surviving in the fact that they're still making some of their best music today after 20 years; Beautiful Day, Elevation, Stuck in a moment you can't get out of, Sometimes You can't Make it on your own, Window in the Skies etc.) But radiohead's songs I just find more tangible where as U2 have a lot of boring, generic non sense.

You might could call some of U2's recent work boring........but serious not their earlier output. Achtung Baby.......War those are definitely not boring albums.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Zooropa was just a continuation of Achtung Baby , which I consider an amazing album. Baby was the experimental one and Ropa just kind of latched on to that. That being said, it's a weird question because of U2's longevity. If you're asking who makes better music today, I'd say Radiohead is so far ahead of them, it's not even funny. U2 has basically become the band that makes catchy radio songs and I'm not really a fan of anything since Zooropa. Radiohead, while I do agree with ADPT that their fans do inflate their image, are still a pretty damn good listen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought the option for "Even" was an actual band at first. I was like "Who the hell is Even?".

Anyhoo, not a fan of either but I'd have to say I prefer some Radiohead songs to U2. I just hate that giant douche, Bono, so I'm sort of biased.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me U2. While both have egomaniac frontmen I'd rather hang out with Bono than Thom Yorke. U2 also made Zooropa before Radiohead made OK Computer which means they actually did the alternative thing first.

These days, Radiohead could produce an album of nothing but static and their more rabid fans would still hail it as a masterpiece. I do like Radiohead, just not as much as people seem to think everybody should.

Even though Zoorapa came before Ok Computer, you can't be saying it is better?

As for rabid Radiohead fans. I think U2 could make album after album of Joshua Tree type songs......and they would win Grammy after Grammy after Grammy.

I'm not saying it's a better album but it was experimental. It even had an MC 900Ft Jesus sample on there. That's about as big a break from Joshua Tree as you can get. I just think they never really get any credit for it or for pushing themselves and everyone acted like it had never been done before with OK Computer.

I think they got plenty of credit for it. It won a Grammy for best alternative album and if I believe right it was nominated for "Record of the Year" that particular year.

If you want to talk about an album not getting credit....lets talk about "Pop", easily one of the most overlooked releases by U2.

I didn't mean in terms of awards, I meant just in general. I can't remember reading too much about Zooropa or seeing critics wax lyrical about it.

I agree with you on Pop. I think it's one of their best albums.

i second your opinion...

i love Pop

its amazing...

havent got Achtung of Zoopora yet though...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Satanisk_Slakt
Where's the option Same shit, different name?

I thought you didn't like that line. Or was it a dig to me because I said so about if Bon Jovi was Pop Rock or Pop Metal or whatever you wanted it to be? :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...