Metal Reviews

By far. Everything about them is superior.

Stuart is a better singer than Bono, and for that matter Tony is better than Bono too.

Stuart was a better guitarist than the edge and so was Bruce., It isn't even close. Those two could shred like any metal guitarist around, they chose not to unless it worked with the song, like the way Ships guitar solo fit.

They are far more techincal. I tried to break down how many chords and licks were in "in a big country" and it was too much. Another song that's impossible to play as recorded unless you are a band member or have an unlimited amount of patience and don't mind learning all 15 variations of the same note sequence.

Tony Butler and Mark Brzezecki were some of the most respected studio musicians around when adamson found them. They can do anything. I consider butler a top 5 bassist ever and Mark is the second best drummer ever, slightly better than bill bruford. David Bowie wanted to hire them, but they weren't interested. That's tony butler playing bass on "back on the chain gang" too.

Big Country were never sellouts. They changed their musical direction at their own discretion, unlike U2 and weren't afraid to fail either. When stuart realized that punk was only gonna get him so much of his musical vision, he left the skids and started his own band. His bandmate would form simple minds. The skids suffered from shit music and lousy sales after these two left, stuartson being the principle songwriter. In the late 80's they abandoned their trademark sound and hired famed virtuoso producer peter wolf. It didn't produce very good music, but they were at least trying not to rehash their past.



anyway that's enough to chew on.

You've said they're better singers, guitarists etc, but you haven't dealt with the actual songs. I mean, I'm not going to say The Edge is Alex Lifeson or anything, but he's far better than people give him credit for. And U2 are fantastic songwriters, love or hate Bono for his persona, his voice is perfect for this sort of music... the new album's excellent. If it was any other band, I'd review it here and praise it to the skies, but sadly there's too much negativity associated with the band's name amongst Metalheads.

The only thing The Edge does is fiddle around with effects. Guitarist my ass.

Truth be told, U2 were good in their salad days...
once they acheived superstardom, they sank in quality, in my ever so humble opinion... as is the wont of so many bands that are no longer hungry, it would seem.
As for Bone-O,
musicians should just stick to making music and leave the wonderful world of bullshit aka politics / social causes alone. Again, IMESHO, as always.

I have never understood the buzz about these guys. Avg british rock at best. I have heard this style done far better, yet they maintain the mainstay for it?
Dunno.. not for me
Ballads not ballady enuff
rockers dont truly rock
mid-paced songs just bore

They need to call up Klaus Mein of the scorpions for songwriting tips!

Oh wait, maybe thats why germans need to stick to rock/pop!

I guess they are ok, but dont get they hype

can't this be said for pretty much every band?

Not necessarily...
some bands have always sucked, superstardom or not.

Ha

That's not exactly what I meant, but I'll take it.

Haha, I think I know what you mean, now.. and that is quite often the case, yes.
No longer being hungry seems to mean that whatever well of inspiration there is, runs dry.

My dad said the exact samething. Bands make better music when they are hungry and poor, then when they are rich and spoiled. All creativity goes down the drain and then they just play music to make more money.

Kinda sounds like Metallica.

Except, Metallica always sucked.
Yeah, I said it.

Oh snap!

I would have to disagree. I like many bands after they have become " popular " per say.

Such as?

There's no hard-and-fast rule, is there? Some bands go bad, some don't. Generally, Metal does tend to be less good when it gets more popular, with a few exceptions - Mastodon? Tool?

or how bout iron maiden you can say they diminished in quality

Meh, AMOLAD was better than Dance and Brave New World, so you could equally say they're getting better. Have had some ups and downs, though. If you mean dimished since Killers, I'd disagree.

They dimished since SSOASS, doing four bad albums (comparing with Maiden standards). After that they've recovered, but not at the level of their first 7 albums.

I think they peaked with Piece of Mind and went downhill since. They still were really good up to Seventh Son and acceptable up to Fear of the Dark but, IMOH, Bruce's departure killed them and his come back didn't manage to bring it all back. Also, too many long songs that would have deserved to be shortened and choruses with the same sentence repeated over and over again killed my love for them.

oooh hissssssss