The Who or U2?

I don't know the musicians very well or dislike them. It's really the music that doesn't agree with me at all

 

Rock would flourish if every groovy band had a frontman like Jim Morrison.
Most rock bands would wish they had anything close to it. Not talking about rock bands like U2 obviously

 

Who...are...you.. too

I dont really listen to either but The Who is better

 

I think Bono is full of himself.

 

I think they're both terribly overrated, but at least the Who always played what I'd consider to be music.

 

Pop music always depends on the era and, for example, Big Band music was popular when recording technology and radios were still quite primitive by today's standards. Songs like Bob Marley's "Buffalo Soldier" and music such as Creedence Clearwater, simply sound better over even a six transistor radio from the 1970s. U2 came along just as modern high fidelity started to become ubiquitous and their music is in the tradition of the "Wall of Sound" style pioneered in late 1960s that sounds good at both high and low volume and fidelity. I would have to say Peter Gabriel is the best modern example of the Wall of Sound, however, the newest speakers coming on the market and sound systems being developed leave no doubt the search for higher fidelity continues. What's known as 3D sound (not surround sound) is coming, where you can hear people whispering behind you, adding a new dimension, while acoustic metamaterials are coming which will make many of our current sound systems antiquated. Imagine just about any flat surface such as your display working as any number of speakers or microphones you need and absorbing sound with perfect fidelity, holding it as a standing wave under the display.

In your living room, the wall paper can already be used as speakers.

 

*goes and bangs on the wallpaper*

 

You can also buy a rear windshield that's a speaker for your car, and has killer sound.

 

If I had to chose from them two bands it would be U2.. I'm half Irish..
Plus, I cant stand! Roger Bloody Daltrey!

 

Why the who ARE, and u2 IS?
Is there a rule in English?

 

i'm not sure. it sounded right when i typed it, but now that you mention it one of them is probably wrong.

i think it actually should have been "is" both times, since in both cases i was referring to a single band. if i had said "the members of x band" then i think it would be correct to say "are".

 

On the other hand, U2 never ventured into rock opera. Though certainly it wasn't for a lack of pretension. Maybe they just think of their whole lives as the opera.

Remember when they got stuck in the lemon? hahaha

 

BOOOR ORR IS THE SPPIIIIIIIII DAAAAAAH

 

Agreed ! U2 sort of peaked with Joshua Tree never really measured up to that afterward.
Bono is extraordinarily pretentious no doubt.

After Joshua Tree just never felt like purchasing a CD for just one or two mediocre tunes, waste of cash really.

 

Apples and oranges

 

Agreed. But I can compare and pick a fav among apples and oranges just fine You?

But who cares about these rockers when there's stuff like the Doors (or Sabbath, or Deep Purple, Creedence, etc.)

 

Precisely , none of them are really worth arguing about. As I said earlier the listener decides what's great and what's not.

None of these bands, Doors, U2, Sabbath, Deep Purple , Creedence Clearwater etc. could possibly make it in American culture today and as baby boomers die off classic rock stations will disappear as well. All of it will become a minor footnote.

The current top 40 offers the glimpse of what's hot and what's not as well.

TOP 40 - June 22, 2019 | American Top 40 With Ryan Seacrest

 

I'll let you know when I'm dead...

 

I don't think it matters how those bands fit in our societies today. It's about the music and with rock it's about how it rocks. Some bands rock/rocked better than others. The recorded albums will be listened to by people who love to rock until the end of times