Quote
Naturalust

Quote
mr_dja

Quote
keefriff99

Quote
dcba

Quote
keefriff99

about the Edge. I cannot BELIEVE people are bashing the guy on here...he is incredibly innovative and brilliant.

He's a one-trick pony. He stays away from power chording, he plays on the top strings, he tends to avoid the root note... since 1981!
He's a good song-writer but yeah a one-trick pony.

And who has he influenced? Keith ahs influenced tons of guitarists but The Edge?

I'm sure the Edge has influenced loads of young guitarists.

And are you seriously suggesting Keith ISN'T a one-trick pony who took Chuck Berry and Ry Cooder for everything they were worth (his words)?

Please.

Wouldn't that make Keith at least a two trick pony?

Peace,
Mr DJA

lol. Keith's incredible songwriting, his stuff on songs like Beast of Burden, his Gram influenced country stuff and decent piano playing, and his early blues influenced playing make him at least a six trick pony. That's more versatile than most rock guitarists and good enough for me.

peace

I'm right there with you Naturalust. I'm pretty sure that Keith's got tricks we don't even know about yet. Absolutely sure that I'LL never master even a majority of his tricks.

Peace,
Mr DJA

hahaha the above threads are very funny.

Keith is at least a nine trick pony as he is one of the greatest songwriters of all time, he plays the greatest electric rhythm ever, greatest acoustic rhythm ever (well at least he used to),he gets an extra trick for the lead to "Sympathy", an extra point for writing "Ruby Tuesday" solo, he plays piano he's had two voices that sing - pre 1975 and post (and incl) 1975 and because of a healthy her ion addiction "Exile" was made.

Edge is more than a one trick pony but not sure what number to deal him - maybe a five?

Clayton is just a pony. Not even a "no trick pony". Just a pony...

I am an idiot. With no tricks. I do have a cat though.

Quote
OzHeavyThrobber
hahaha the above threads are very funny.

Keith is at least a nine trick pony as he is one of the greatest songwriters of all time, he plays the greatest electric rhythm ever, greatest acoustic rhythm ever (well at least he used to),he gets an extra trick for the lead to "Sympathy", an extra point for writing "Ruby Tuesday" solo, he plays piano he's had two voices that sing - pre 1975 and post (and incl) 1975 and because of a healthy her ion addiction "Exile" was made.

Edge is more than a one trick pony but not sure what number to deal him - maybe a five?

Clayton is just a pony. Not even a "no trick pony". Just a pony...

I am an idiot. With no tricks. I do have a cat though.

Enough with the @#$%&' ponies, lol. The bottom line is that the Edge is an incredibly innovative guitarist and has used many textures and techniques.

He did things with the instrument that no one had done before. Our dear Keith can't claim that.

All I'm saying is that some of you are ridiculously short-sighted and myopic when it comes to other bands here. It's as if you all feel that praising a non-Stones musician means you're taking something away from the Stones. It's nonsense.

I'll take Keith over the Edge any day and twice on Sundays, but that doesn't mean I can't recognize the man's legit greatness.

I agree Keefriff and well said - typed I guess - although I think Keith was innovative with regard to what he brought to music with G tuning especially. Cooder may have showed him the tuning but that sound, those tones, those riffs, licks, songs - I believe that's Keith's greatest pony trick of all - OK no ponies as you requested - so how about I think his innovativeness was so great with this that it's a blue whale!

Quote
keefriff99


I'll take Keith over the Edge any day and twice on Sundays, but that doesn't mean I can't recognize the man's legit greatness.

Finally, a very intelligent comment on another guitarist!!!
You don't have to like someone's playing style to acknowledge his greatness.
Cheers Keefriff99!

Cheers,
Wuudy

Quote
OzHeavyThrobber
Only bug about here appears to be the one in your bottom.
Clayton is as replaceable a band member as there ever has been. I don't care if you agree or not. Again when you bring up ACDC - the bassy (Williams?) doesn't cop song writing royalties.

Uh huh. It's not that I agree or not, it's that you're just choosing to ignore the obvious. What Cliff doesn't do with the songwriting in AC/DC is his deal. Perhaps he says "Alright, mate, I learned the song" and that's that. If credit is given then obviously they did something. Even John Bonham got songwriting credits and all he did was, to use your way of putting it, put drum lines to those songs.

"The only bug here appears to be in your bottom." I'M TELLING!!!!!!!!!!!

Good grief that's so 1940s. Can't you come up with something a bit more... inventive?

Quote
OzHeavyThrobber
"Perhaps in U2's eyes the bass player coming up with his lines IS part of writing the song" - that's a novel thought. Putting a bass line to a song has nothing to do with its composition - unless the song sprang from the bass line itself. I know of no song ever mentioned that was attributed to him being the catalyst for it. And if there was he's been more than compensated for it living off the song writing talents of Edge and Bono.

So then... with that logic Eddie Van Halen didn't write Eruption because it's just a guitar solo. What you're choosing to ignore is that you don't know what Adam Clayton does regarding songwriting. Perhaps a bass line did inspire a song (which is how Mysterious Ways got written. I guess I should've said "written" because, you know, he just played a bass line and that's just not songwriting). Not every U2 song credits Adam Clayton, just as not every Stones song is just Jagger-Richards when someone else has something to do with it.

Yet every song is automatically Jagger-Richards when sometimes one of them has zero or very little (singing backing vocals counts as songwriting in the Stones apparently since that's all Keith did on Sway) with the song in any regard.

Quote
OzHeavyThrobber
And all he does for the majority of the music Edge or Bono to a lesser extent writes is bring a whole bunch of mediocrity to it. There's 'serving the song' and then just not bringing any life to it - the latter of which he suffers from too regularly in my opinion. He lives on root notes barely stepping out of them and arguing to the contrary is pointless. I mean listen to when Bono throws to him in "Gloria" on Under a Blood Red Sky. About as musically interesting to listen to as a car crash. And anyone learning the guitar or bass could have played it after a few minutes. Seems he's proof of it.

As I pointed out earlier, you really should listen to U2's LPs from ACHTUNG BABY through NO LINE ON THE HORIZON. Perhaps you have a cemented idea of what U2 and Adam Clayton sound like that's not dealing in reality?

Quote
OzHeavyThrobber
Get in a twist about it if you wish as it means nothing to me, but Adam was born under the luckiest of rock 'stars'...

Yer hilarious. I'm not the one in a twist about it. You've put some effort in to stating how lame Clayton is and describing how he sounds without obviously having heard anything from 1991 onward. And if you have then you've decided to not admit it.

Quote
OzHeavyThrobber
When Clayton first joined the fledgling U2, he did not have formal training in the bass.[7] In the band's early years, he generally played simple parts in 4/4 time.[16] Bono said of Clayton's early bass playing, "Adam used to pretend he could play bass. He came round and started using words like 'action' and 'fret' and he had us baffled. He had the only amplifier, so we never argued with him. We thought this guy must be a musician; he knows what he's talking about. And then one day, we discovered he wasn't playing the right notes. That's what's wrong, y'know?"

That is funny.

Did Keith or Ronnie or Angus or Jimmy and on and on have any "formal training" on guitar?

The Edge is an incredible Guitar player.
Being open to other bands music allows one to be able to appreciate greatness and recognize it when you see and hear it. The Edge, like Keith, are both great at what the do. You are allowed to like more than one bands music.

Quote
keefriff99

And are you seriously suggesting Keith ISN'T a one-trick pony who took Chuck Berry and Ry Cooder for everything they were worth (his words)?

Please.

"one-trick pony"?
The 1963 Berry-infused Keith isn't the 1966 "pop" Keith who himself isn't the 1969 open-G/E "doctor doom" Keef, who isn't the 1978 "back to standard" Keith etc etc.
So I find insulting to compare a guy who never stopped re-inventing hismelf to The Edge.
And regarding the U2 guitarist take his pedalboard from him and he's nothing.

Face it : U2 is a BIG band simply because they had a clever manager (McGuiness) and a sinegr with an oversized ego. Without these two, U2 would be a small band with a following covering Ireland.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-12-12 23:06 by dcba.

Quote
dcba

Quote
keefriff99

And are you seriously suggesting Keith ISN'T a one-trick pony who took Chuck Berry and Ry Cooder for everything they were worth (his words)?

Please.

Face it : U2 is a BIG band simply because they had a clever manager (McGuiness) and a sinegr with an oversized ego. Without these two, U2 would be a small band with a following covering Ireland.

While the 2 things you listed certainly contributed to their success, you are ignoring their song writing, a sound that was fairly unique in the 80s and their very strong live performances. They had the goods to be a big band, but it's really their relentless touring in the 80s that made them the big band that they still are today.

They wanted to be the biggest band in the world and their drive to achieve this led them to constantly tour in the US to break it big there. As an example, in Southern Calfornia where I live, they played at the US Festival in 1983 in front of over 100,000 people and impressed a lot of them who continued to be fans. Without any substantial hit singles, they went from playing to crowds of less than 1,000 in 1981 to playing arenas 2 years later. In 1984-85 they sold out 4 arena shows in the LA area. In 1987, they easily sold out 5 arena shows before The Joshua Tree was even released. That was all based on their reputation as a live act, not on having big hits, and a band has to have a lot going for it to be a great live band that builds a large audience.

Quote
dcba

Quote
keefriff99

And are you seriously suggesting Keith ISN'T a one-trick pony who took Chuck Berry and Ry Cooder for everything they were worth (his words)?

Please.

"one-trick pony"?
The 1963 Berry-infused Keith isn't the 1966 "pop" Keith who himself isn't the 1969 open-G/E "doctor doom" Keef, who isn't the 1978 "back to standard" Keith etc etc.
So I find insulting to compare a guy who never stopped re-inventing hismelf to The Edge.
And regarding the U2 guitarist take his pedalboard from him and he's nothing.

Face it : U2 is a BIG band simply because they had a clever manager (McGuiness) and a sinegr with an oversized ego. Without these two, U2 would be a small band with a following covering Ireland.

A singer with an oversized ego??

LOL!!! WOW!!!

How @#$%& myopic can you get? A STONES fan bashing another band's egotistical lead singer?? ALL LEAD SINGERS ARE EGOTISTICAL!

Yes, our dear Mick is just a paragon of humility, a real wallflower, that one.

And a good manager?? Oh, right...Andrew Loog Oldham and Prince Rupert had NOTHING to do with making the Stones successful.

It's unbelievable the lengths some of you will go to justify your hatred for a band.

Yeah it's easy to bash The Edge, the fact that he uses his pedal board as one of his important tools doesn't make him less a musician, imo a cheap shot. Who knows how he would have developed without it? The trap that you have to be a virtuoso on your instrument to make good music is false and ignorant. Keith's two fingered approach to his open G stuff is a testament to that.

I'm not saying that I like The Edge much but he has a few GREAT songs and I did find some new found respect for him when I saw his reaction to watching Jimmy Page play Whole Lotta Love (quite sloppily) in that It Might Get Loud documentary. That joyful humility from him and Jack White definitely put a smile on my face.





peace

I wonder if they finally found what they've been looking for....

You're an angry lad GasLightStreet and given you seem to take this so personally I tired of reading your responses a few lines in.
Someone has an opinion that differs from yours. Learn to live with it and not see it as a personal affront and then go on the attack. I have no doubt you've been accused of being needlessly argumentative in your life before now.
I know you will be compelled to respond to this as it appears your nature but to save you a little time I'll tell you now that I'll not bother reading it as I'm not here to argue over nothing with type on a screen. I'm here to have fun and express my opinions and read opinions of others without being jumped on or jumping on anyone.
You should try it. You might be able to do away with your blood pressure meds.
Now enjoy monotonously quoting, highlighting text and grouching away.

Quote
OzHeavyThrobber
You're an angry lad GasLightStreet and given you seem to take this so personally I tired of reading your responses a few lines in.
Someone has an opinion that differs from yours. Learn to live with it and not see it as a personal affront and then go on the attack. I have no doubt you've been accused of being needlessly argumentative in your life before now.
I know you will be compelled to respond to this as it appears your nature but to save you a little time I'll tell you now that I'll not bother reading it as I'm not here to argue over nothing with type on a screen. I'm here to have fun and express my opinions and read opinions of others without being jumped on or jumping on anyone.
You should try it. You might be able to do away with your blood pressure meds.
Now enjoy monotonously quoting, highlighting text and grouching away.

And once again you have mightily astoundingly missed it all and have disregarded anything I pointed out to you, who has failed to even remotely consider anything with even 1% of seriousness due to your stubbornness. I'll let someone's earlier accurate response say it all - again:

Quote
keefriff99
All I'm saying is that some of you are ridiculously short-sighted and myopic when it comes to other bands here. It's as if you all feel that praising a non-Stones musician means you're taking something away from the Stones. It's nonsense.

Quote
keefriff99

It's unbelievable the lengths some of you will go to justify your hatred for a band.

No hatred just being realistic. U2 is a mediocre band that was propelled into the stratosphere of superstardom by McGuiness's promo skills and Bono's inflated ego.

They deserve the same harsh treatment as Nickelback because they're the Euro version of Nickelback : an annoying band with enormous undeserved success. But at least Chad Kroeger knows how to shut the f@ck up unlike Bonehead.

If crap music like "Elevation" gets your titties hard in the morning more power to you. Me I find this unsufferable.

Around 1987 "Mullen recalled that "We were the biggest, but we weren't the best". [en.wikipedia.org]

That's still true Larry...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-12-13 11:39 by dcba.

I love the fact that U2 are playing 4 shows in Stockholm and
I'll be attending all of them. Just perfect!!!

Quote
dcba

Quote
keefriff99

It's unbelievable the lengths some of you will go to justify your hatred for a band.

No hatred just being realistic. U2 is a mediocre band that was propelled into the stratosphere of superstardom by McGuiness's promo skills and Bono's inflated ego.

They deserve the same harsh treatment as Nickelback because they're the Euro version of Nickelback : an annoying band with enormous undeserved success. But at least Chad Kroeger knows how to shut the f@ck up unlike Bonehead.

If crap music like "Elevation" gets your titties hard in the morning more power to you. Me I find this unsufferable.

Around 1987 "Mullen recalled that "We were the biggest, but we weren't the best". [en.wikipedia.org]

That's still true Larry...

Comparing U2 to @#$%& Nickelback is just pure trolling, and I ain't taking the bait.

Cheers

All U2 and Bono haters should just take it easy and go watch Ronnie Wood
playing with boy band One Direction instead.....hehehehe!!!!

Where's an Elton John thread I can pollute?

Quote
keefriff99

Comparing U2 to @#$%& Nickelback is just pure trolling, and I ain't taking the bait.

That's tooooo bad cos I made you run a few miles already. Thx, it was fun!
And have a few good U2 shows in 2015-16 (and I mean that one)

Quote
dcba

And regarding the U2 guitarist take his pedalboard from him and he's nothing.

Face it : U2 is a BIG band simply because they had a clever manager (McGuiness) and a sinegr with an oversized ego. Without these two, U2 would be a small band with a following covering Ireland.

And take Keith's amp from him and he's just what?

The Edge created a lot of memorable riffs - just like U2 as a band created a lot of memorable songs. The well may be running dry lately, but they have this in common with our beloved Rolling Stones.

Face it : What you write about the Edge and U2 is just rubbish. Clever managers and singers with oversized egos are no exclusive U2 trademarks - what about Andrew and Mick? Where would the Stones be without them?

Enough. Just say that you don't like U2, their sound and their songs. That's ok. And enough.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-12-15 08:01 by retired_dog.

<<And take Keith's amp from him and he's just what?>>

Still pretty good.

Pity that both Edge and Bono have struggled for years with failed hair transplants.

Wigs early on would have been the way to go. Now its just too obvious.

What should we anticipate on the set list???

U2's tour expanded due to demand.

As expected, U2 blew out initial on-sales for the upcoming Innocence + Experience tour, selling out in every city that went on sale yesterday. A total of 44 shows went up yesterday, with approximately 660,000 tickets sold.

Among the box office triumphs were a record-setting 118,000 fans queuing online to purchase tickets for Madison Square Garden in New York, resulting in two additional shows going up; and two new shows each for Boston, Chicago, Montreal, Amsterdam, Stockholm, Berlin and Paris.

[www.billboard.com]

Didn't even try to get a ticket. Got my AC-DC, that something else...

Quote
GasLightStreet
U2's tour expanded due to demand.

As expected, U2 blew out initial on-sales for the upcoming Innocence + Experience tour, selling out in every city that went on sale yesterday. A total of 44 shows went up yesterday, with approximately 660,000 tickets sold.

Among the box office triumphs were a record-setting 118,000 fans queuing online to purchase tickets for Madison Square Garden in New York, resulting in two additional shows going up; and two new shows each for Boston, Chicago, Montreal, Amsterdam, Stockholm, Berlin and Paris.

[www.billboard.com]

And your point is? Abba would sell five times these numbers if they toured with remaining members.

Guess the point is that they sell extremely well:-) The point with Abba was not very relevant

The U2 shows have been selling decently, but there doesn't seem to be that much interest. The NY shows sold reasonably well, but tickets for the initial 4 shows are still available in the 200 section at $300 per ticket. Although not as expensive as the Stones, that's a lot of cash. For the two additional shows that went on sale the other day (the shows on July 26 and 27), a number of sections in the 200 level were reduced in price from $300 to $100. I bought 2 in section 225, row 5 for $100 apiece. Those same tickets were priced at $300 for the shows that went on sale earlier. The additional Chicago shows aren't selling at all. I would estimate less than 50% of tickets in the stands have been sold. Scalpers should take a bath on these shows.

With the new mapping feature on ticketmaster, you can actually see what seats are left. I'm afraid U2 has seen its popularity take a bit of a dive.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-12-17 22:07 by drbryant.

Quote
drbryant
The U2 shows have been selling decently, but there doesn't seem to be that much interest. The NY shows sold reasonably well, but tickets for the initial 4 shows are still available in the 200 section at $300 per ticket. Although not as expensive as the Stones, that's a lot of cash. For the two additional shows that went on sale the other day (the shows on July 26 and 27), a number of sections in the 200 level were reduced in price from $300 to $100. I bought 2 in section 225, row 5 for $100 apiece. Those same tickets were priced at $300 for the shows that went on sale earlier. The additional Chicago shows aren't selling at all. I would estimate less than 50% of tickets in the stands have been sold. Scalpers should take a bath on these shows.

With the new mapping feature on ticketmaster, you can actually see what seats are left. I'm afraid U2 has seen its popularity take a bit of a dive.

Are there seats for the lone musician in the band, that guy under the stage.