HighLlama wrote:
I think U2 did some fun, creative stuff, but they're not one of the all-time great bands. Some really terrible lyrics, though.
Aerosmith is an interesting comparison. I get your point. I like some early Aerosmith, before they reformed and used outside songwriters. But I could never hear them again and be happy. I always related U2 to Metallica a bit. Like, they are to post-punk what Metallica is to metal. Talented, some good music, but kind of the watered-down version. They seemed to make better music the less they cared about being hugely popular.
The one major distinction I'd point out is that U2 weren't really founders of the genre they played in, they just did that genre in a commercially appealing way.
Metallica really were one of the founders of the genre they played in. Sure,
speed metal had already been around for a few years but it tended to focus more on technical skill and melodic playing. Some European punk bands hinted at the heavy+fast direction but Metallica applied that formula to much more sophisticated arrangements. Between them and Exodus a whole new style distinct emerged.
_________________
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing. —Malcolm X
Just a reminder: under international law, an occupying power has no right of self-defense, and those who are occupied have the right and duty to liberate themselves by any means possible.