What a fun convo, and it stayed civil which is awesome!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Typical_Ant
I love them both though a bigger fan of DMB. I've seen U2 twice as opposed to high 30's with DMB.
I think U2 is more universally loved AND hated. Because any thing or person that gets that famous is going to have haters.
I don't really see any comparison in the 2 TBH. Musically or performance wise. U2 is excellent in the studio and has one of if not the best SHOWs I've ever seen. The stage, lights, video etc is always cutting edge and unique.
However the show itself never changes other than a song or two on any given night in a tour. They'll tour for 2.5 years on an album and you could see them 10 times and get a difference of maybe 5 songs. It makes sense because so much more is involved with the production and being on queue with video and lights.
DMB are better musicians. Dave at his best is better than Bono at his best in songwriting if you're looking for lyrics that aren't surface level. Bono can certainly write an anthem, but a lot of his lyrics lack depth that are covered up by being catchy, melodic and easy to sing a long with. That's pop. There is nothing wrong with that IMO.
DMB never really had that universal sing a long hit song outside of of Crash. Yes they have lots of hits, but not on the same level. Where U2 could play 20 greatest hits in a show and EVERYONE knows the words to every song. DMB is going to have play Ants, DDTW, Crash, Everyday, SMTS and Space Between... But what else really has any universal connection for them? Those individual songs don't hold up to any one individual song that U2 has.
And I would like to see the U2 hits again and again. They could and do play Steets, One love, Beautiful Day every night and they don't really get old. With DMB I actually don't want the hits, I want the unique things they do.
I'll take a DMB show any day over u2 though.
|
Love what you wrote Typical_Ant, and agree with most of it. The only place we diverge is on U2 as a live band, and the aspect of U2's "quality" that I didn't hear mentioned so much in other comments (a few definitely did mention it) is their power live.
Putting all the true comments about them as more of a popular music band and maybe simpler concepts in their lyrics and lack of variation in their live shows when comparing setlists on any given tour (all true), what I don't think has been raised up enough is that when they're ON, and they're on a lot when they tour, they are a FORCE to be reckoned with.
I've seen U2 probably 12 times (with a huge gap between '96 and 2017), and seen DMB 80 times (but not at all since 2008). And overall I've seen over 1,500 concerts in my life (probably close to 2,000), mainly because for about 25 yrs of my life starting as a teen, my social life was music-centric so my friends and most of my socializing was all around live music.
That said, while neither DMB nor U2 are in my top 5 ever favorite live acts, if I had to pick a top 5 ever of specific concerts, an '85 U2 show would be in that top 5, of over 1,500, because I had shitty seats, had been to the dentist before the show and was in pain, and had the flu, and yet it was powerful beyond words. I have a review of it saved somewhere and the person who wrote it captured all I felt, it was a gamechanger and a lifechanger. And that is NOT about lights and special effects, although I will say that masterful use of staging and how powerful political or emotional messages are presented was definitely part of the powerpunch.
Obviously I love DMB live, given I've seen them 80 times and will probably see them again for 1st time in 14 yrs sometime in next year. And I've had my mouth dropped open in awe at the amazingness of DMB live several times. But I can't say I've ever had that "We were transported to Nirvana, saw God/Goddess, and returned super-charged with magic energy" experiences with DMB, much as I adore so much of their music and their shows.
It still doesn't make one band "better" than another, and I totally agree with whoever said if I could only see 10 shows total between the 2 bands, I'd see U2 3 times on the same tour and DMB 7 because with DMB I'd get 7 different shows. With U2 I'd just get to enjoy amazing songs and the minor differences 3 times.
Also agree that musicianship wise, DMB beats U2 hands down. And yet... U2 can write some songs too, although I do prefer the complexity of DMB songs (whether about world issues, inner struggles or sex), DMB are superior song writers.