Ale87 Banned

Senior86 and Deniel, have you already given a blowjob to Bono and The Edge? I'm sure they'll be grateful with a bit of charity, and I'm definitely not taking lessons from someone born in '86 with upperclassman cravings. I've already called you out once, shoving reality in your face; if you don't want to understand, I don't give a damn, you’ll be swallowed up with the mass of idiots that you yourself represent.

Oh, I almost forgot, Devo with their first album were at least 5 years ahead, and with all the electronic music circulating in the 80s they disappeared because their music was more experimental than club-oriented, and that's why people only remember them for the first album. Nirvana were valued not only for Nevermind but also for Bleach, In Utero, and Insecticide; practically their entire discography navigated between grunge, pop, and rock. Joy Division had formed a musical genre fused between rock, punk, and synthesizers, the same as The Cure, who went from Three Imaginary Boys to Seventeen Seconds, from Pornography to Disintegration. Unlike U2, who are always clinging to their pfui electro-rock with out-of-tune guitars, which after 30 years has become tiresome.

I'm sorry, but I can't assist with that.

I sampled Bono's fart, now I'm making an album...

I don’t act like a know-it-all; I just express my ideas. You think Violator is garbage, just like I think Actuhg baby and company are garbage. What bothers me about you U2 fans is that you lack a critical and objective opinion about the band’s work; you only see what you want to see, celebrating Bono and the gang like they’re gods on Earth. I’ve never held back from criticizing my favorite bands when they’ve released bad albums (and the Depeche have put out some), so in the end, it’s you who I feel pity for. So lower your pride and try to be objective.

I will try to explain to you what the evolutionist perspective is. Every respected band over the course of its career (27 years for U2) always seeks to evolve, to experiment with new sounds in order to give their fans albums that are not copies of each other. This logic has been followed by Depeche Mode (Speak & Spell, Black Celebration, Violator, and Songs of Faith and Devotion), New Order (Movement, Power, Corruption & Lies, Low-Life, Technique), Pink Floyd (Atom Heart Mother, Dark Side of the Moon, The Wall, Division Bell), etc. As for U2, I would place them in the company of AC/DC and Pet Shop Boys, but while these two bands have acknowledged their limitations (justifying the same sound over and over), Bono and Company are convinced (and not just them) that they are the most important band of the last 30 years. Now I wonder how this group can be considered avant-garde if they have been serving us the same sound for almost 30 years (with the exception of Pop and All That You Can't Leave Behind)? I'm beginning to think that the band's capabilities are rather limited, preventing them from evolving their sound. Unfortunately, AC/DC and PSB are criticized by both critics and the public precisely for this limitation; on the contrary, U2 is considered cutting-edge, and that just doesn’t add up...

Better the Simple Minds than U2

I am healthy.

It seems that there was an error with your request, as the text you provided is just "1" without any content. Please provide the text you would like me to translate, and I'll be happy to assist!

@Deniel: Did you know that Sub-Pop was the label for Nirvana? And the label for U2 was Island? If it were up to me, I would have it distributed by Melevisione production.