U2 vs. R.E.M

[singingsparrow]

Often, when discussing music with all kinds of local club-owners and street musicians, they almost always claim that U2 and R.E.M are the two best bands rock and roll have had to offer the past two decades.

Both have enjoyed eras of massive success, airplay dominance and still draw huge touring crowds.

But which one strikes you as more impressive? Why?

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton

[singingsparrow]

Here's my personal analysis.

*************MUSIC************

Edge: U2 (U2 have the upper hand as far as sound is concerned.

While R.E.M are geniuses with arranging familiar power chords in different styles, U2 have far more solos and memorable riffs. The Edge can play a mean and jangling solo in any case.

R.E.M deserve very much credit for evolving their sound multiple times, from folk in their first decade to jangly pop on "Out Of Time", to the experimentation of horn selections on "Automatic For The People", to punk on "Monster", and beyond. However, U2 have constantly evolved as well, experimenting with folk, hard rock, electronica and funk, and assembling memorable records time and time again.

***************LYRICS**************

Edge: R.E.M: (Bono is quite an exemplary songwriter too, but Michael Stipe has got to be the lyrical messiah of his generation, and several generations following his.

Stipe always has such a surreality to his lyrics. Constantly flowing with grandiose, poetic imagery and nostalgia, Stipe is a master wordsmith whose creative engineering yet to rust up.

Bono may well be the runner-up for the best lyricist of the past two decades. He writes moving songs constantly that many can relate to, from modern emotions, to war in his home country and the world, to catchy pop jingles. However, Stipe's versatility overshadows him just a bit.

**************IMPRESSION**************

Edge: U2 (Michael Stipe always has his hands full, and that is commendable.

However, Bono is the far more impressionable lead single. Though he comes off as egotistical to many, he is honored by governments of many nations, peoples, even African tribes, for all he does constantly in researching and helping third world nations, stopping the AIDS epidemic, working for peace in Ireland, etc. His face has appeared on virtually every magazine cover, including Time for his efforts.

Michael Stipe does more than the average man as well, though not far as much on a global scale. Both are incredible role models, though Bono's the one a majority would likely be thanking if asked who's done more.

**************OVERALL SUCCESS**************

Edge: U2 (U2 climbed to the top of the world in 1987 when "The Joshua Tree" would become one of rock's most cherished albums, fresh off the huge success of #1 smashes "With Or Without You" and "I Still Can't Find What I'm Looking For", with Alternative success that still resonates to this day.

R.E.M reached their height in fame when "Out Of Time" continued R.E.M's streak of follow-up albums doubling up on their predecessor releases, with the #2 smash 'Losing My religion", which their dominating fame would continue through half of the decade.

U2 have both more total record sales and more total charting singles in comparison to R.E.M. U2 also has a more broad worldwide appeal.

Also, it is important to note while U2's last release propelled U2 back into the limelight and went quadruple platinum, R.E.M have failed to launch back to a mass audience.

U2 dominates here.

***************WINNER**************

U2.

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton

[Keith3000]

I think I'll go with U2 here, though they're both great bands.

Noah, excellent analysis by the way!

[jimmy74747]

I like U2 enough to have purchased their greatest hits CD's. Some of their earlier stuff is phenomonal. "Pride"
and "Where the Streets Have No Name" are my two favorites. I was disappointed with most of their 90's material, but did enjoy what I heard from their last album.

Not a big fan of REM. I'm not crazy about Stipe's voice and find him a bit pretentious.

[thedualityofman]

I have to say R.E.M. over U2 for a couple of reasons.

Not looking at chart success, extra ciricular activities, etc, and just the music.  I have a thing about being able to listen to a cd/album/whatever all the way though.  While I love most, if not all of U2's singles (Discoteque included).  I just can't seem to enjoy a U2 album all the way through, although I can listen through most of The Joshua Tree and Auchtung Baby.  It just doesn't happen with me and their other albums.

R.E.M. on the other hand, regardless of their 80s material, their 90s material, or their current, I can appreciate their albums all the way through. 

Also, while yes, there aren't many who can play guitar better than The Edge, I haven't seen him jam on much else.  Peter Buck is always bringing in some other form of stringed instrument in R.E.M.'s albums, thus, more originality, and listening from album to album doesn't become a tidious and monotonous affair.

And yes,  while Bono can write a damn good lyric.  I don't believe there's anyone from the 80s, 90s, or now who could touch Michael Stipe, lyrics wise.

[NORTHCOAST]

I really don't know enough about R.E.M to be able to vote.  Just got Out of Time from the library and wasn't too impressed.  Though I love Losing My Religion.  I do think U2 trumps REM on the "cool" factor.  I do remember some VH1 show recently where one of the contributors mentioned R.E.M. and kinda dissed them as being nerds.  I'm gonna have to check out more of their albums from the library cuz I'm gonna see them in concert in October.  Gotta get more up to speed. 

I do love Joshua Tree though.  Running to Stand Still is so descriptive and beautiful.  And love the 1,2,3 hits too!  Still!

[thedualityofman]

As much as I like Out Of Time, that's not the album to judge R.E.M. by. You can't really judge them on the grounds of one album period.

I'd say to have any grasp of R.E.M., you'd have to atleast hear Out Of Time, Document, Monster, Life's Rich Pageant, Automatic For the People, Reckoning, New Adventures In Hi-Fi, Murmer, and Green.

Basically most, if not all of their back catalog.

[Mega248]

I like them both about the same but I voted for R.E.M. because they're so far behind.

[Miguelín]

I prefer R.E.M. over U2. I like every R.E.M. song while there are some U2 stuff that I don't stand

[jond7699]

U2 because I think they have made a bigger impact on the music scene for a longer period of time

[Gorminako]

Another great match. REM may be a little more consistent, but U2 will more often put out outstanding songs. U2 was stronger in the beginning, REM in the middle, and U2 more recently. I'd say U2 is also deeper and more variable. I think "New Year's Day" is one of the best songs of the '80's.

[irice22]

U2, but I find both of their newer stuff quite boring.

[Deleted]

irice22 said:

U2, but I find both of their newer stuff quite boring.

[tico]

U2 by a long shot.

[singingsparrow]

Gorminako said:

Another great match.  REM may be a little more consistent, but U2 will more often put out outstanding songs.  U2 was stronger in the beginning, REM in the middle, and U2 more recently.  I'd say U2 is also deeper and more variable.  I think "New Year's Day" is one of the best songs of the '80's.

I think they own three of the best 80's songs.

"With or Without You", "Bad" and "Where The Streets Have No Name"

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton

[thedualityofman]

At the same time though, R.E.M. also have three of the best 80s songs.

Its the End Of the World As We Know It (and I Feel Fine), The One I Love, and Orange Crush are equal in their importance to 80s music as the three U2 songs you mentioned.

I wouldn't have gone with Bad though for a song to represent U2 though. Perhaps New Years Day or Bullet the Blue Sky (my personal favorite U2 song).