Remove this Banner Ad

AC/DC verse Coldplay

  • Thread starter Thread starter strauchy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

My comment obviously wasn't a diss on AC/DC; it was simply a reinforcement of what others have said in the thread; album sales is never a good guide to quality, or influence, or, well, anything really, other than good marketing and/or an instance of groupthink.


please tell me whats an indicator of a good successful band.. and also please tell me which band you like better and why. im very curious
 
please tell me whats an indicator of a good successful band.. and also please tell me which band you like better and why. im very curious

Some just simply use $$$ as a guide, . Others consider making their music emotionally deep to a niche crowd, and bypass $$$ to a certain extent. Both kinds of bands will consider themselves successful if they achieve their aim. Although, one band may be intrigued by the latter, but then they get attracted by the $$$ and become a band that fits the former case.
 
Not meaning to be obtuse, but why does there need to be an indicator? It is music, after all.

Got it in one.

There's no 'special formula' that makes up a successful band. You either like a band or you do not.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

ok guys..going by what you all say.. Led Zeppelin and AC/DC are just as successul as Shannon Noll.

If you're going by more commercially successful, ie more records sold, then yes, Led Zep and AC/DC are more successful than Nollsy.

But why should it matter to someone if a certain band has had more success in the mainstream than the other? All that matters is whether you like their music and if you like them, then doesn't it make a band successful, even if you're the only person on this planet that likes a certain band?

Shannoll Noll is putrid, but someone that prefers his music over Led Zep and AC/DC isn't going to care about album sales now, are they?
 
Music is the most contextual subject out there, there is no universal formula that defines success. I'd say Amorphis have been successful but everyone else here would go; who the flap are they?
 
Music is the most contextual subject out there, there is no universal formula that defines success. I'd say Amorphis have been successful but everyone else here would go; who the flap are they?

Exactly.
 
because apparently album selling is irrelevant so that fits.
and oh yeah, theres no special formula to calculating a 'successful band'

this is what you guys are saying.

Of course it's irrelevant. There are always artists/bands who have a hit song that the collective of people (i.e. basically everyone you know and are acquainted with) think sucks arse. Does the fact they sell somehow make them better than something that people actually like?

Put simply; why are you trying to quantify something that cannot be quantified?
 
If you look throughout history of popular culture, then large sales usually do go hand in hand with the best bands.

For example, the Beatles argualbly the most critically and loved band of all time, who happen to be the best selling band as well. Rolling Stones highly regarded with massive sales too. Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd in the 70's, two bands that successive generations discover have also sold shit loads of albums. Metallica, the most critcally acclaimed metal band and also the best selling. Even if you bring it to the present, where rock has to compete with other generes like rap, R&B, pop idol etc, then obviously sales will not be as big, but the cream usually rises to the top (Kings of Leon for instance).

At the end of the day, quality does = sales
 

Remove this Banner Ad

If you look throughout history of popular culture, then large sales usually do go hand in hand with the best bands.

For example, the Beatles argualbly the most critically and loved band of all time, who happen to be the best selling band as well. Rolling Stones highly regarded with massive sales too. Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd in the 70's, two bands that successive generations discover have also sold shit loads of albums. Metallica, the most critcally acclaimed metal band and also the best selling. Even if you bring it to the present, where rock has to compete with other generes like rap, R&B, pop idol etc, then obviously sales will not be as big, but the cream usually rises to the top (Kings of Leon for instance).

At the end of the day, quality does = sales


You have provided examples of decent bands that have had $$$ and musical success in the past. However that last statement is so wrong in todays music industry, it is almost a laugh it has been brought up.

Here is a list of best selling albums in the USA of each year of this decade

Each to their own, but do you consider all of these quality artists?
 
No not at all, but that is not the kind of music I listen too. I was talking solely about rock bands with the highest sales (not pop/r&b artists etc) There is always going to be a huge market for that type of music though, with the best from those fields crossing over into other markets like Mariah Carey crossing from pop to R&B, Eminem gets sales from both the rap and rock markets etc. I suppose the same applies to the best selling rock bands. It is all about crossing-over
 
No not at all, but that is not the kind of music I listen too. I was talking solely about rock bands with the highest sales (not pop/r&b artists etc) There is always going to be a huge market for that type of music though, with the best from those fields crossing over into other markets like Mariah Carey crossing from pop to R&B, Eminem gets sales from both the rap and rock markets etc. I suppose the same applies to the best selling rock bands. It is all about crossing-over

You could also take the view that those succesful bands are those that are viewed as good by more people, without neccessarily being the best.

Album sales have got nothing to do with who is a better band from individuals points of view, however they do say something about that bands ability to rank in the "good" category of peoples tastes.

And back to the main topic, I prefer Coldplay over AC/DC.

I think Coldplay write good stadium songs, and as a fan of U2 they are very similiar in this regard. Chris Martin is very entertaining live, and they exceeded my expectations when I saw them earlier this year. They aren't the most innovative or skilled musicians but they consistently churn out good songs.

AC/DC don't really do it for me. The voice is irritating, and other than the guitar riffs I'm not a massive fan.
 
NOW! before you all yell at me..... i clearly stand on one side! and its 100% one side...

AC/DC all the way!

200 mill albums to around 50..which explains alot aswell..

but i was arguing with a good friend of mine. and he claims that coldplay are better and said that the best thing about AC/DC are their techno music mix of thunderstruck and called AC/DC -not a band


what do you have to say to this?

Coldplay have released 4 studio albums AC/DC have released 16. By this arguement this puts Coldplay on par with AC/DC statistically.

I'm not a fan of either band by the way. I'd rather listen to paint dry than Coldplay or AC/DC (post Bon anyway).
 
If you look throughout history of popular culture, then large sales usually do go hand in hand with the best bands.

For example, the Beatles argualbly the most critically and loved band of all time, who happen to be the best selling band as well. Rolling Stones highly regarded with massive sales too. Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd in the 70's, two bands that successive generations discover have also sold shit loads of albums. Metallica, the most critcally acclaimed metal band and also the best selling. Even if you bring it to the present, where rock has to compete with other generes like rap, R&B, pop idol etc, then obviously sales will not be as big, but the cream usually rises to the top (Kings of Leon for instance).

At the end of the day, quality does = sales

Clearly with the bands you mentioned it does ,but often quality does not = sales. Eg Bowie's masterpieces Low/Heroes sold zilch while crap like Fleetwood Mac sold millions.

Anyway I like 70's AC/DC when they were straight rock n roll and while Bon Scott was lead singer. But in musical terms Coldplay are the superior band by a long way.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

The McDonalds menu is simple, well marketed, easily digestible and as easily forgettable. Clearly the best on the planet.
 
Clearly with the bands you mentioned it does ,but often quality does not = sales. Eg Bowie's masterpieces Low/Heroes sold zilch while crap like Fleetwood Mac sold millions.

More often than not quality does = sales. Those two Bowie albums each contain a side worth of experimental, electronic, instrumentals. Hardly stuff that is going to help shift millions of albums.

This is all subjective of course, and yeah we can all name bands which we think should of been bigger than they were or are.

However, if you compile a list of the 20 biggest selling rock bands, I reckon at least 15 of them would be among the most critically accaimed - which lets face it, is the only way (after your own opinion) that one can gauge the merits of a band.

So I am sticking with the theory that the best bands will usually sell the most records.
 
I think Guy Sebastian v Opeth is the better incarnation of these threads myself !
 
Always preferrred Ricky Martin myself. He's just a wannabe :D As for Opeth, were they the ones who mullered Deep Purples Soldier of Fortune?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom