FadingSoul

For me, their only competition is R.E.M. I mean both bands have a mind-boggling amount of amazing songs. I could fill several sheets of my favorite song. Not too mention nobody sounds like Bono and The Edge and no one ever will. Plus most people should know Stipe when they hear him. I am glad to have these bands around to listen to when I grow tired of everything else.

codefree

Achtung Baby
All That You Can't Leave Behind
The Joshua Tree



So, yes I agree that U2 is the best band of the 80's & 90's.

atlantamoi

Here we go again. "ATYCLB" is NOT a masterpiece. The others are. But my least favorite U2 CD was not released in the 80's or 90's. It was in 2000.

Mafia81RCV

Not to take anything away from U2, I think Aerosmith saw more success in the 80's and 90's. When you listen to the radio today, the U2 you hear is either from the 80's or All That You Can't Leave Behind, very little from the 90's. Aerosmith however, had huge hits in the 90's that are still on the air today. U2 was arguably the best band of the 80's (vs. The Police basically), but not both decades IMO.

BDB

The only reason aerosmith had some big hits in the 90s was cos of Liv Tyler and Alicia Silverstone. And those 3 videos.


No question of the last 2 decades U2 are the band every other band wishes they were.

raithen

Bands from the 80s who were better than U2:

Depeche Mode
New Order
Front 242
Iron Maiden
Pet Shop Boys

Of course, this is completely subjective - but I honestly feel that U2 are incredibly over-rated. A great band, but definitely over-rated.

As for the 90s... one master-piece ("Achtung Baby") and one semi-masterpiece ("Zooropa") does not elevate (excuse the pun) the band to "best of" status. And yes, I left out "Pop", which to me was a trashy, forgettable misfire...

But don't get me wrong, I do love them.

-matt

monkey

Here we go again. All That You Can't Leave Behind is a masterpiece, IMO. As was Pop, IMO. I love Depeche Mode, New Order, and Pet Shop Boys. However, Depeche Mode's embarrassing early releases and New Order's rather weak lyrics disqualify them, IMO. IMO, U2 is the best band of the '80 and the '90s and are one of the three greatest rock bands since The Beatles. (See if you can guess the other two). And yes, it's all subjective. Which is why music is so great.

atlantamoi

Yeah, Monkeyboy, it's all subjective and I don't mean to tick anyone off (too much!) by my comments. While I really don't think the last U2 recording is a masterpiece, I have grown to like a few songs on that CD.

But I REALLY don't understand how anyone could compare U2 and Aerosmith. You wanna talk about Top 40 hits... okay, maybe Aerosmith had more. I don't know. But Aerosmith in the late 80's and 90's (and today).... PULEASE.

monkey

True that. BTW, my name is monkey, not Monkeyboy.

atlantamoi

Oops. Sorry! Should look a little more carefully on this end.

POWERBOMB

I think U2 was more consistent in those decades than most other bands. But they spent more time putting out fewer cd's than the other bands also. But I can't argue when the facts are clear that every release and subsequent tour was a hit, money wise.

raithen

1. All That You Can't Leave Behind is an Adult Contemporary masterpiece. There's about as much edge (pardon the pun) to this album as any typical Cat Stevens release.

2. Depeche Mode may have had some "weak" early singles ("It's Called A Heart" and "The Meaning Of Love" come to mind), but surely tracks such as "People Are People", "Just Can't Get Enough" (mature? no. a classic? yes.), "Everything Counts", "Blasphemous Rumours" and "Shake The Disease" make up for this. The only thing truly embarressing about the band in the early days was their style - but then again, check out Bono in the early years. And certainly DM's early videos were terrible - but so was pretty much every video at the time.

3. New Order had weak lyrics? "Temptation", "The Perfect Kiss", "Truth Faith", "1963", etc, etc. "Weak"? I fail to see how U2 were more poignant or powerful than Sumner, et al. New Order have always had obscure lyricism - U2 have always been right in your face, and at times rather preachy. And btw, Mr. Hewson is quite a Joy Division/New Order fan - no wonder, they rock!

4. Pet Shop Boys. You forgot to tell me why Chris and Neil were inferior.

5. Iron Maiden. I suspect you left them out because you don't appreciate their music? Anyway, regardless of whether you do or not - there is little doubt that Maiden were more prolific and had more chart success than U2. In the 80s anyway. Of course, chart success sometimes has little to do with whether a band is truly "great" or not, but if we're comparing "best band" of a certain decade I think popularity is somewhat valid. That being said Steve Harris is a wizard with lyrics - writing some incredibly intelligent songs about any number of topics (history, mythology, fiction, reality, etc). A huge band in the 80s that has somehow slipped into obscurity (heavy metal/hard rock took a beating with the advent of electronica and grunge in the early 90s).

Anyway, it is definitely a subjective topic and I respect your opinion - but I had just had to jump to the defense of my bands )a bad habit of mine! ) and I figured it was an interesting debate! It would be boring if we all agreed, right?

I love U2, but I think that only three of their albums were really "classic" - The Unforgettable Fire, Joshua Tree, and Achtung Baby!. They've somehow managed to transform themselves from a band who had so much conviction and visceral power, to a band that has sold themselves out to satiate the pop masses. I've lost a lot of respect for this band - but they were a pretty damn fine one at one time.

Cheers!

-matt

atlantamoi

raithen, I agree with what you said about U2 and New Order. I don't think New Order's lyrics are weak at all. They really stand out. I'll bet there aren't too many people out there who like Iron Maiden AND the Pet Shop Boys! I like all kinds of music, but never got into heavy metal. I really don't get a band like Iron Maiden at all. However, I do think the Pet Shop Boys get a bum rap sometimes. "Very" from the early 90's is one of the best recordings of that decade.

monkey

[QUOTE]Originally posted by raithen
1. All That You Can't Leave Behind is an Adult Contemporary masterpiece. There's about as much edge (pardon the pun) to this album as any typical Cat Stevens release.

Agreed.

2. Depeche Mode may have had some "weak" early singles ("It's Called A Heart" and "The Meaning Of Love" come to mind), but surely tracks such as "People Are People", "Just Can't Get Enough" (mature? no. a classic? yes.), "Everything Counts", "Blasphemous Rumours" and "Shake The Disease" make up for this. The only thing truly embarressing about the band in the early days was their style - but then again, check out Bono in the early years. And certainly DM's early videos were terrible - but so was pretty much every video at the time.

Agreed. U2 made some pretty stupid videos too. Just look at "New Year's Day."

3. New Order had weak lyrics? "Temptation", "The Perfect Kiss", "Truth Faith", "1963", etc, etc. "Weak"? I fail to see how U2 were more poignant or powerful than Sumner, et al. New Order have always had obscure lyricism - U2 have always been right in your face, and at times rather preachy. And btw, Mr. Hewson is quite a Joy Division/New Order fan - no wonder, they rock! [/b]

Agreed. Although I find the lyrics of their (New Order) last few releases quite inferior. And yes, U2 used to get mighty preachy.

4. Pet Shop Boys. You forgot to tell me why Chris and Neil were inferior.

They're not. I just don't like them AS MUCH as U2.

5. Iron Maiden. I suspect you left them out because you don't appreciate their music? Anyway, regardless of whether you do or not - there is little doubt that Maiden were more prolific and had more chart success than U2. In the 80s anyway. Of course, chart success sometimes has little to do with whether a band is truly "great" or not, but if we're comparing "best band" of a certain decade I think popularity is somewhat valid. That being said Steve Harris is a wizard with lyrics - writing some incredibly intelligent songs about any number of topics (history, mythology, fiction, reality, etc). A huge band in the 80s that has somehow slipped into obscurity (heavy metal/hard rock took a beating with the advent of electronica and grunge in the early 90s).

You're right. I'm not a fan.

BTW, the other two bands I spoke of were The Clash and Joy Division.

raithen

I've never really thought of that video as "stupid" per se... but it's certainly pointless.

While I agree that New Order has declined since Technique, I'm not sure if I agree that the lyrics have necessarily weakened. Republic had a few fantastic tracks, but other than "Crystal" on their latest - the music has been disappointing.

Nobody's perfect!

I've always felt The Clash were good in small doses. That being said they certainly are one of the few bands in the past 30 years who had integrity and balls. They are the very definition of punk.

There's not enough great things I can say about Joy Division though.

-matt

The Cow

Metallica

Flashback

Ah - what a fantastic band. But they have not fallen too obscure
as for the fact they can still fill up an arena as of last year.
Oh, maybe obscure as in news well Shhhhh.

monkey

Yes, Joy Division was incredible. I do like the music on the latest New Order album; I just think the lyrics are juvenile. "Technique" was their last great album; "Republic" hit and miss, mostly miss; but "Get Ready" seems to be a return to form, despite the lyrics. Do you like Electronic or Monaco? The most recent Monaco album definitely has some catchy tunes.

I sure miss Ian.

Chrisedge

Yes. Done. Iron Who? Depeche Who? Joy Who? Hate to say it even R.E.WHO? All of these PALE next to one of the most important bands since the Beatles. Say what you want about ATYCLB, (I think it's a great album) These guys have cemented themselves as an important band as just about any. Think about it, when the HOF comes around to inducting any of the bands mentioned in this thread, the only ones I would be make it on the first go around would be U2 and R.E.M. (my wife will kill me for that, as she is a huge DM fan)

The question should be, will they be the band of '00's?

MatthewCho

This is quite a subjective thread, but I agree that U2 is very over-rated. While they have many fabulous singles, they have not grown much as a band. Nearly all their songs can be interchanged; the 80's songs sound like the 90's songs sound like today's songs. Dave Matthew Band falls into this category as well.

When they did branch out a bit, with "Pop," critics attacked and they immediately retreated back to their old sound.

Although I am not a huge fan of Metallica, they're an example of a band that progressed artistically, changed with the times, and still maintained a fan base.

That being said, here are my picks for best groups of the 80's and 90's. Each one can be noted as a band that has grown artistically. Some are traditional rock, some are not.

Pet Shop Boys
Depeche Mode
Duran Duran (can't wait for the comments on this one)
R.E.M. (although their current material is a bit too laid back for me)

- Matt

P.S. Bono's big head (the most swelled in the business) has increasingly grated on my nerves over the years as well. That being said, The Edge rules!

monkey

This is hilarious. They haven't grown as a band? Listen to "Boy." Then listen to "War." Then listen to "The Unforgettable Fire." Then try, oh, "Achtung Baby." Then move on to "Pop," and finally the new album. Then try telling me they haven't grown. I'm sick of people saying the new album is a return to their older sound, because frankly, I have yet to hear a U2 album that sounds like "ATYCLB."

Bono's head has always been swelled. At least he uses his position to do some good in the world. Oh, for shame!

MatthewCho

Sorry to disappoint, but their hits from ATYCLB sounds interchangeable with their 80's and 90's hits. This is not a new concept, as nearly every review I've read mentions their return to their "classic" sound.

- Matt C.

MatthewCho

...with the exception of the Tomb Raider mix of "Elevation," which I love and was surprised radio did not warm up to.

Don't get me wrong, I like U2 and saw them on the Elevation tour. Personally, I think "Stuck..." and "Beautiful Day" are two of their best songs ever. I still can't believe that "Stuck..." was offered for nomination vs. "Walk On."

However, their ATYCLB tracks are not exactly a breath of fresh air.

- Matt C.

DrRingDing

'80's - yes
'90's - no way

SubZero

I personally will vote for Depeche Mode and Pet Shop Boys.
First, Depeche Mode revolutionized the use of electronics in music. You can ask pretty much any artist who dabbles with technology, and almost every single one will list DM as a primary influence. Their production combined with Martin's lyrics have always been a huge leap ahead of the crowd. Regarding the "cheesy" aspects of their early career, keep in mind that Martin was forced into a songwriting role after Vince's departure. Many of the songs on their second effort (Broken Frame) are songs that he wrote around the ages of 15-16. They've always done their own thing regardless of opinion. Anyone who has read the liner notes from the first singles collection knows what I mean.
As for PSB, they have pretty much defined house and club music from the beginning. Their use of the art of the remix has always been years ahead of anyone else. These come to mind:
Frankie Knuckles' remix in 1988
Sasha's remix in 1993
Marc Kinchen's (a remix genius) remix in 1993
Basement Jaxx's remix in 1997
David Morales' remix in 1990
Rollo's remix in 1993
There simply is no arguing that the PSB are one of the most progressive, successful, and relevant duos to ever record music. This might be confusing to some Americans because of their lack of success here, but it's undeniable.

U2 to me has always been somewhat bland. I do respect them, but to me there have always been more compelling artists out there. Just my opinion.
Jon