[rolo_tomachi]

Originally Posted by Rdkopper

This is pretty impressive and I'll give credit where credit is due:

U2 have released 12 studio albums and are among the all-time best-selling music artists, having sold more than 150 million records worldwide. They have won 22 Grammy Awards, more than any other band, and in 2005, they were inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in their first year of eligibility.

Well, U2 always overrated from 1997. They do not deserve so many grammys, but I must say they are more important than Bon Jovi. Damn, U2 has influenced a lot of bands, including Bon Jovi, you just have to listen Keep The Faith and see some nods to Achtung baby ... Jon also has been trying to copy the sound of u2 in the last decade.

In fact, I'm sure Jon would try to put his next album on itunes for free if he could.

[Faceman]

Both bands are huge. Period. All the rest is just a dick waving contest between the fans.

And regarding the 22 Grammy Awards Rdkopper pointed out: A critically acclaimed band always wins the trophies. Especially if they have a certain kind of standing. So a jury that does not even nominate the These Days album but gives 22 Grammy Awards to U2 and one Grammy to a song called Who Says You Can't Go Home can't be taken serious!
Furthermore, in my opinion, when the critics love you there are way more concertgoers or albumbuyers just because they read that it must be good then when you're a band that's been slapped in the face on every opportunity.
So all those comparisons of figures are bogus to me.

[rolo_tomachi]

This was the last great single that U2 released (IMO)

U2 - Window In The Skies (Modernista Version) -...

[nikos greece]

grammys and hall of fame are not sth more than being liked by the right people in the business...enough said...
the records sold speak volumes when we are talking about such numbers but there are other acts with similar figures...

ps.window in the skies is a great song imo as well

[#becausewecan]

no album is selling millions like they used to. not just bon jovi but every band singer etc. Critics have always slated bon jovi, and loved u2. u2 could simply fart down the mic and it would get a great write up. Bon Jovi will always make records regardless, not just a PR stunt which has backfired..

Bon jovi in my opinion is a better band by far and i am not just saying that because of being on this forum. i enjoy U2, always have. Every album has been a good listen, some better than the rest.

however you need to stop comparing the ''current'' album to the previous like some people have done with WAN.

WAN is not a great album not the best bands effort, but i would say it was a good album. they are allowed to make mistakes, and the band will never ever make the same mistake twice.

[nikos greece]

[QUOTE=#becausewecan;1181958]no album is selling millions like they used to. not just bon jovi but every band singer etc. Critics have always slated bon jovi, and loved u2. u2 could simply fart down the mic and it would get a great write up. Bon Jovi will always make records regardless, not just a PR stunt which has backfired..

Bon jovi in my opinion is a better band by far and i am not just saying that because of being on this forum. i enjoy U2, always have. Every album has been a good listen, some better than the rest.

however you need to stop comparing the ''current'' album to the previous like some people have done with WAN.

WAN is not a great album not the best bands effort, but i would say it was a good album. they are allowed to make mistakes, and the band will never ever make the same mistake twice.[/QU

well said

[Supersonic]

Aloha !

Originally Posted by nikos greece

Seb the way to judge a hit single is by its performance in the social media, especially the you tube views and the torrentz downloads, imo these 2 are some strong indications...

They are, but social media and youTube views are limited to a specific group; The kids and young adults of 5-20 year olds or something. I'm 30 years old now and I never, ever check out anything on Youtube unless the video is spectacular, and then that's it.

With U2 being a band with a market of 30 to even 50 year olds now, downloads and airplay are a huge factor as to how big the song is. The 30-50 year olds are the ones who purchase the single and will listen to the radio at work. Considering how Ordinary Love cracked the top 20 in so many countries, and even the top 10 in a few I'd say it's fair to say it's a hit. But the same goes for any artist, really. Airplay should not be underestimated and is based upon both what a record company wants the radio station to play, but also what the audience of a specific station wants to hear, and the chart table I posted earlier illustrates how many markets U2 is covering compared to how many markets Bon Jovi cover.

Originally Posted by nikos greece

u2 or springsteen should always come in to prove that bj arent good enough...it comes to a point that i wonder how come some guys spend so much time here when obviously have so many other favorite bands..

See, I don't get this. I no longer post much on multiple messageboards, but why can't someone not be an avid poster on several messageboards? I follow many, many artists much like I follow Bon Jovi nowadays. Why should someone not be allowed to come up with examples of Springsteen and U2 when needing to make a point in regards to how narrowminded Jon is nowadays? So far I'm not detecting any undeserved critisism towards Bon Jovi in this thread. If anything, Jon could learn a thing or two from U2 when it comes to marketing and advertising. Really, what promo has the band done for their last 2 albums apart from "Spend a week in London and play on the roof of the O2 Arena"?

U2 haven't played a single note of their new record and already everybody's talking about their stuff. It happens time after time, and yet with every subsequent new Bon Jovi album Jon's willingness to invest time and money into promoting it seems to be more limited. There's a reason why U2 are as big as they are, and it's not because of a work ethic like Jon's.

Salaam Aleikum,
Sebastiaan

[nikos greece]

the radio sets are sadly set in stone in 90% at least, they play the big bands hits and the ones who they pay them to pay, very few, mostly indepedent djs will play stuff they just like and discovered, ordinary love was played because it was u2 but didnt really perform well, the same goes for the other single. there is no them only us...huge publicity stunt, superbowl add/airing etc...
the grammy nominations and hall of fame as i said before are another joke...ordinary love won golden globe and was just shy from an oscar????noone else is annoyed by the way the force feed us what music to hear, who should we idolise, who is great???i can easily name 5-6 recent u2 songs i like but i m tired of that strategy/policy... i have money and powerful friends and i will force every mediocre song to be huge...
rolling stone gave 5 stars again...what was the last rolling stone's review for the bj record? 2 stars...it deserved 2 stars...and the songs of inocence deserves 3 at best...
jon isnt willing to pay too much money but on the other side knows it will make no difference, if a song works ok if the first single doesnt then the whole album is probably doomed...i dont agree with that, i m just stating that bono's ego is annoying

[rolo_tomachi]

Perhaps the future of U2 and Bon Jovi is not in the music. Looks like they need to be driven by technological advances.

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/ne...ormat-20140918

[jovifan93]

Originally Posted by Supersonic

Aloha !



Every single charts shows a different kind of market, with the Billboard Hot 100 on top compiling an average of all different markets. So yes, Vertigo was a bigger hit than Who Says was. If anything, Who Says illustrates why it's so difficult to have a huge national hit in the U.S.A. nowadays. There's too many genres being popular in too many different states. What can be huge in one state might be under the radar in the next.

Sorry, but I think you contradict yourself here. According to your post, Vertigo/U2 covered more individual markets than Who Says/BJ, but in the markets that both covered, Who Says did better, including the Billboard Hot 100, which, if I read your post correctly, is the most important one, since it compiles an average of all different markets.

So how do you come to the conclusion that Vertigo was bigger based on the "evidence" you presented?