What, so you mean instead of the left end of the arena they should have built the stage at the right end of the arena? :dozey:

 

Or the middle of the arena and run back and forth across the stage trying to keep the two sides from tuning out when their backs were turned.? (It's been done, lots. First concert I ever went to, actually. I don't like it.) Or maybe they should have built a stepped one on top of the seats at one end. (Complicated, dangerous, and still at one end.) Or maybe they should have just done away with the stage entirely and played in the crowd- oh wait, they did. It's called the C-stage. (And it's been done before.):dozey::dozey:

 

I know, maybe they should have put shiny butterfly stickers on all their amps, so they looked different from U2's, and then they would be original. :dozey::dozey::dozey:

 

Stage layout, outfits, set list construction.

Because an avant garde setlist full of b-sides and covers would go over ever so well with a radio-listening crowd. :thinking:

 

Go, watch Zoo TV, and you will get what I mean. Sure Coldplay added a bit. Still the fundamental parts are oozing Zoo TV.

And a million other shows before it. Were you around in the glam rock 70s? Between glam and hair metal, pretty much everything that could be done had been done by the end of the 70s or early 80s. At a glance, Zoo TV looks like a bunch of glam stuff (shiny pants!) paired up with Giant TVs for the MTV crowd of the time. Oh look- one of the glam icons is U2's (and Coldplay's) creative guru. Nothing new to see here people, move along. :rolleyes:

 

 

 

...BUT, to paraphrase what Matt Bellamy said once in an interview (don't remember which one, sorry) Everything you could do on a stage with a guitar has already been done. All that guitar god stuff is very old now. It's clichéd. They do it anyway in a very tongue-in-cheek way because it's fun and it works.

 

I think the big problem with this type of thinking in music is that it makes the classic mistake of confusing innovation and invention. This attitude says that to be original (and apparently originality is nessesary to have "good" music or shows) you have to invent something new.

 

Yet as a recent issue of Maclean's wrote:

Invention and Innovation. The words are often used interchangably, but their meanings are quite different.

 

....Invention [Roger Martin] wrote recently, in a report for the Instituete for Competitiveness & Prosperity, is that rare magic producing "something new to the world." Innovation, on the other hand, refines what already exists.

 

Invention creates the mousetrap. Innovation makes it more efficient, easier to use or more profitable to sell. Both a crucial, but in the long run building better mousetraps may prove the more important.

 

....None of these [innovations] (better frozen foods or bank accounts or circuses) seem as earth-shattering as, say, the invention of the microchip or the discovery of insulin. But innovation requires that same spark of inspiration, and it's the means by which most progress actually occurs.

 

My actual point, U2 figured out how to do massive (but alienating) shows well. Coldplay figured out how to make huge shows feel as intimate as if they were playing in a tiny club. To innovate you need a template to start with. But kudos to Coldplay, that innovation was a pretty big (and needed) breakthrough, even if the invention-for-legitimacy crowd think any template makes them unoriginal. (Frankly, that crowd has been pissing me off for so long I shouldn't care any more.)

 

I say originality is both invention (new out of the blue) and innovation (small positive adjustments).

Stage layout, outfits, set list construction.

 

lights, screen, guitars, bass, drum.... damn even Chris is using a microphone just like Bono !

 

Thank you God for having created U2 otherwise nobody would be able to make music and concerts !

 

Hello Aurélie ! ;)

lights, screen, guitars, bass, drum.... damn even Chris is using a microphone just like Bono !

 

Thank you God for having created U2 otherwise nobody would be able to make music and concerts !

:laugh3: LMAO

 

(@Hi Angélique :kiss: )

LATEST ALBUM STATS:

 

No Line On The Horizon- UK- Got to Number 1- stayed there for one week

SALES: 1,000,000

Highest Ranking Single: 12

 

Viva La Vida- UK- Got to Number 1- stayed there for 5 weeks.

SALES: 8,000,000 +

Sold 1, 600,000 in the first week

Highest Ranking Single: 1

 

Coldplay are still going strong, stronger than ever!

U2 are...well...not exactly big anymore...

Coldplay blatantly ripped off the ideas of every band that went before them by playing live concerts. Can't they think of something else to do after releasing an album? They even use guitars, I mean come on that's been done to death as well!

All I know is Coldplay have a looooong way to go to make their shows as spectacular and brilliant as U2. a U2 concert is an “experience”. And a very unique one. I mean I love Coldplay way more than U2 but for me their live shows are kinda….meh:\. Great live music but nothing else to make it worth the 60 quid you’ve spent. You would expect more from a band who claim to be the world's best at the moment.

£60...It's about £40/45, isn't it?

Coldplay blatantly ripped off the ideas of every band that went before them by playing live concerts. Can't they think of something else to do after releasing an album? They even use guitars, I mean come on that's been done to death as well!

:laugh3: +1

 

(@bossman: *w* little Sammy is preparing for Top Gear?! :lol: )

 

All I know is Coldplay have a looooong way to go to make their shows as spectacular and brilliant as U2. a U2 concert is an “experience”. And a very unique one. I mean I love Coldplay way more than U2 but for me their live shows are kinda….meh:\. Great live music but nothing else to make it worth the 60 quid you’ve spent. You would expect more from a band who claim to be the world's best at the moment.

I'm not totally aggreing on this...Sure a U2 gig is a real 'event' and it's fun from time to time to see shows as spectacular as these but I think that you kinda loose the emotion in gigantic shows like these, sometimes all the decorum step upon the music side and it's a bit of a shame IMO...

£60...It's about £40/45, isn't it?

 

M.E.N was from 49 up to a couple of hundred when i bought mine!:confused:

:laugh3: +1

 

(@bossman: *w* little Sammy is preparing for Top Gear?! :lol: )

 

 

I'm not totally aggreing on this...Sure a U2 gig is a real 'event' and it's fun from time to time to see shows as spectacular as these but I think that you kinda loose the emotion in gigantic shows like these, sometimes all the decorum step upon the music side and it's a bit of a shame IMO...

 

i suppose its personal preference. i'd rather experience a real event to be fair! lets be honest, most of a man's budget should be spent on united and derby days rather than going to a few live shows every year!:smug:

 

I'm not totally aggreing on this...Sure a U2 gig is a real 'event' and it's fun from time to time to see shows as spectacular as these but I think that you kinda loose the emotion in gigantic shows like these, sometimes all the decorum step upon the music side and it's a bit of a shame IMO...

 

I agree. the music should be what should be focused on. I don't want to go to an "event" i want to see my favorite band play me some music:heart:

 

I didnt even have the money to go see coldplay live, and I cried because i thought i would never have the chance to see them.I returned my electric piano i got for christmas to come up with the money. and you know what, coldplay made me feel that it was worth every penny to go see them:smug:

Great live music .

 

Precisely, isn't it the most important, great music ? You don't need these spectacular shows if you have good music ! Look the Coldplay Live 2003, you'll see what I mean !

 

 

:

I'm not totally aggreing on this...Sure a U2 gig is a real 'event' and it's fun from time to time to see shows as spectacular as these but I think that you kinda loose the emotion in gigantic shows like these, sometimes all the decorum step upon the music side and it's a bit of a shame IMO...

 

Exactly, the emotion ! This is what I'm looking for in a show and this is what Coldplay gives me !

Coldplay are still going strong, stronger than ever!

U2 are...well...not exactly big anymore...

 

:stunned:

that's pure bullshit,sorry. if it were really ripping off, i'd agre, but this is...pure bullshit.

Coldplay need to develop an identity of their own.

 

how Coldplay is inspired by others and not them not have their own identity? :wtf:

 

 

Im not the only one who noticed it either. Bono calling Martin a '******' shortly after Zoo T...errrm Viva La Vida went under way.

 

and Chris told his wife that she sang better than Bono but played worse than Edge.

something like .

 

invoation and invention. yes this is the first thing to lose the identity of a band.

I think is the inspiration of mind that counts and not copy others bands .

 

 

I know the fans U2 harsh and critical their favorite band are the first to say U2 has lost his career in big shows, politics etc.. ect . Larry think leave of his band .

but I think things are better , and Bono doing very well now.

I agree with the Muse person. The stage nowadays is very cliche. It was in 1992 as well. U2 did copy the glam rock of Kiss, but for a different reason. They did it mainly to mock them. Zoo TV was a front and U2 admitted it.

 

After Rattle and Hum U2 were so self conscious about themselves, their image. They tried so hard to be themselves in Rattle and Hum they came across as pretentious. It nearly destroyed them. So when designing the show for the music they had written. A dirty, alternative glam album. They decided instead of doing the stage, screen and guitars they'd blow it up. They took the phrase "Go big, or go home" literally. Zoo TV wasn't a concert it was show with a message of its own.

 

To the guy who said he saw Zoo TV live I am envious of you. U2 did not create anything in ways of stage layout with Zoo TV, but they own it now.

 

I saw Viva three times, once to an audience of roughly 60,000. I saw the show while it was young and when it was in full flight. It wasn't until the arena date did I see Zoo TV everywhere. U2 barley changed their set list for Zoo TV, and were criticized for it. They couldn't the music was based around the show. So much like Viva La Vida was.

 

Once again, Im saying I love and respect both, and for different reasons. I can tell you Bono and Chris are influenced by each other. Yet Bono hold an audience from the second he walks onto the stage. Look at the War Child gig for example. When The Killers come out, its pretty loud, when Bono strolls onto stage he stands there and the roof is blown off. His showmanship is something Chris will one day hopefully match, but in a different way.

 

As for musically, Viva La Vida comes nowhere near Achtung Baby. I compare those two because they are the albums up to now that have saved both bands.

 

As for 360, they ripped themselves off. If you look at the layout its the exact same, as the Vertigo arena stage. They wanted to bring that feel to the arenas. And no they arent in the center, they are to one end, 30% is behind them, not 50.

 

Also compare Running to Stand Still into Streets and Hardest Part into Viva La Vida. Two slow moods setters into their super hits. I didn't know Coldplay didn't rip off the set lists either.

 

As for B-sides that alienated their audiences, the largest, and hailed as one of the best of all time.

Coldplay is not a ripoff of U2. Saying that on here will offend people.

Coldplay is not a ripoff of U2. Saying that on here will offend people.

 

It hasn't for what I've seen...Most people are giving better responses than I could. I said it as a thought, and most people are disagreeing, but nicely. Its meant for conversation. I can't read another LP5 thread...

Woah! Coldplay did NOT rip off Zoo TV. If you think that then you know nothing about either live tour. Coldplay's suits were based loosely on Revolutionary/Civil War costumes which kind of encapsulated the 'historic/old times nature of their album thanks to songs like Cemeteries of London and Viva La Vida. Zoo TV was a satirical take on the ever expanding influence of the media and impressions of pampered rock stars the media portrays, which some may call ironic now seeing as Bono, it could be argued, HAS actually become The Fly in real life! About as much similarities between Anne Widdecombe and Charlize Theron.

 

And the Running To Stand Still/Where The Streets Have No Name v Hardest Part/Viva comparison is really being desperately picky. You can find an example by ANY live band who progress from a mellow to full out anthem. It's the nature of sound - the sound better together. As I said - you're being really picky.

:dozey:

You will never find a band that hasnt taken something from someone else..

 

Its practically impossible to have an original show these days.Everything has been done to death after so many years of live concerts

You are only a stupid hater :lol: your comparisons do not make sense at all

I like what you've written and I agree with most of it except for the last line "I thank God for U2, because without them, Coldplay wouldn't exist." Im pretty sure coldplay would still exist but yeh, their music would be slightly different. U2 are not even coldplay's biggest influence. Chris is in inspired mostly by Bob Dylan. Plus a whole host of other bands as im sure you know (Flaming Lips, Aha, Echo & the bunnymen etc...).

 

Well, in the Rolling Stone interview, Chris said the following...

 

U2 are the only band whose entire catalog I know by heart.

They may be the only good anthemic rock band ever. Certainly they're the best.

 

And yeah, Coldplay might still exist...but they would be so different that I'm not sure they would even be to my taste anymore. And I still hold that they might not exist at all, since if you read the actual article it seems like U2 are what inspired Chris to become a musician in the first place.

 

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/lists/5702/31963/32099

 

And I hadn't heard that Bob Dylan was Chris's biggest influence...Bob Dylan's great, but his singing voice... *shudders*

That's what we've learned from U2: You have to be brave enough to be yourself.

 

I remember reading that a while ago. Achtung Baby was the first album Chris hear. He then goes on to make commentary about society and fame... The things that Zoo TV poke fun at.

 

The best part of that article is the quote above...took Eno to teach them that.

It wasn't until the arena date did I see Zoo TV everywhere. U2 barley changed their set list for Zoo TV, and were criticized for it. They couldn't the music was based around the show. So much like Viva La Vida was.

There are countless band that didn't change their setlist...not revelant AT ALL!

 

 

Also compare Running to Stand Still into Streets and Hardest Part into Viva La Vida. Two slow moods setters into their super hits. I didn't know Coldplay didn't rip off the set lists either.

:laugh3: are you really serious with that one?!! Cause EVERY artists alternate hits and mellow songs! It's cause 'alternation' and you do that to not bored your audience...U2 didn't even anything as well as CP didn't ripp off them on that!