Re: Musical argument....
While I think U2's work is overall stronger than the Beatles (I really don't like the McCartney songs) it is doubtful they will be remembered as a greater band. It's silly to judge, just because the Beatles (like so many of the great 60s bands) were together for such a short period of time compared to bands like U2.
The only argument I've ever really seen with any merit is Bob Dylan Vs Bruce Springsteen, just because both were putting out music for such long period of times, but even then its still pretty much apples and oranges.
The Beatles, despite there being many better British bands at the time will never be able to be fairly compared to any other band in history due to their immense popularity (in terms of fans and critics today.)
One thing that really doesn't help U2 is they aren't nearly as big as they were 10 years ago, and then they weren't as big as they were in the Joshua Tree period Rattle and Hum tour.
U2 does play Helter Skelter better than the Beatles ever could though.
|
07-04-2005, 04:34 AM
Linear Mode
