Don’t people on the Dope believe in facts anymore instead of wild guesses?
Here’s Entertainment Weekly’s list of top-grossing tours in 2005"
You know who’re the only ones to appear on both lists I gave? Barry Manilow and Rascal Flatts.
What’s your point, Exapno? Are you actually going to argue for these acts as the “biggest rock band”?
You’ve made your point - sales would suggest that rock bands aren’t happening. Fine. But were the Velvet Underground ever popular? Iggy and the Stooges? The Ramones? Big Star? And yet these band matter today in terms of their influence.
If you look at the Billboard top 100 at any time - 99% is crap that will never endure. So?
U2 wasn’t on the list of best-selling albums for this year because they haven’t released an album since 2004.
There’s big and there’s BIG. I don’t listen to most of the “now” big but I sure as hell listened to the vintage “big” and for the most part, they’re still big. Hate to go into “geezer mode” but I don’t think most of today’s “big” will still be big in 30 or 40 years. I also don’t think many of the most influential bands of the last half decade were ever considered “big” in their prime.
Dollars, record sales, concert draw, influence, innovation, etc…all these things play into “big.” It’s too broad to narrow down exactly as the OP was presented. Dave Matthews makes headlines every time he takes a dump. But as WordMan said, they probably won’t even be a ripple on the pond of the Big Picture. However, I do consider him “big” in some way.
I prefer to have these conversations in someone’s living room, listening to the music, comparing, absorbing, mulling over. For every example I throw down, the next guy can throw two. And so it goes…
And of course by “half decade” I meant “half century.” FUCK. I hate when that happens!
Album sales have peaked but I get the impression that Dave Matthews has attained a kind of jam band cult status not unlike The Greatful Dead or Phish. As long as you have upper-middle class white college kids who like to get baked and listen to music in an open-air amphitheater, Dave mathews will continue to enjoy success.
But as the Niblonians said - Dave Mathews does not ‘rock’.
I can’t stand the guy. I’m sure you’re right about the cult status, although not to the degree the Dead or Phish had it. But since we were talking about album sales, that band definitely isn’t growing. And I wouldn’t expect their ticket sales are growing either. I figure those sales have probably receeded from a peak a few years ago, and are now at a plateau.
The Stones, if this question had been asked 30 years ago. Their concerts still make tons of loot, but to qualify as “biggest,” they’d also have to sell bazillions of records. When I saw the Stones on their “Voodoo Lounge” tour, their opening act, Counting Crows, was selling more albums at about 5 to 1. I don’t think their album sales have gone up appreciably since then.
Two problems with that statement:
- From a band’s viewpoint, the record is the advertisement for the concert. Most bands make their money from ticket sales and merchandise.
- Album sales for older, big-name acts (think “Rolling Stones”) are flat-to-unremarkable, even when their tours are successful. Bands like the Rolling Stones are touring on their names and their reputations, and people will turn out to see them even if/when their new album sucks. Fans going to a show want to hear stuff from deep in their catalog (19th Nervous Breakdown, Under My Thumb) and not the entirety of their latest album.
Bands that “matter” - at least to you and the tiny cult of people who think like you - have never at any time in the history of rock been the “biggest” band. Never. Not by any reasonable definition. In fact, Cult bands are the antithesis of Biggest bands.
The OP asked a specific question. Its answer calls for a different set of criteria than you’re offering.
And my answer is, and has been, that rock today is so fragmented that there may not be a meaningful answer to who’s the biggest rock band today. There are big concert bands, and big album bands, and big influential bands in ways that don’t show up in the numbers. But there may not be “a” biggest band. But if there is, it cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, be a cult band.
Um, no. Dude, you and I talk fine when it comes to books, but on music, we clearly disagree. What is “cult” about U2? They are huge - and, using criteria I have suggested but am VERY open to discuss (that is why I am posting to this message board), they matter.
Metallica - before Load and Re-load - mattered. Not cult - not with 15 million sold of the Black Album.
Green Day - with millions sold of Dookie (their first major label CD) and American Idiot (their most recent) - matter. Not cult in the slightest.
That’s my whole point - what makes “the biggest rock band” is that a band is NOT just a cult band - they have huge sales, as mentioned in the OP - and ALSO hold onto some thread of truly mattering.
By far the biggest band ever - the Beatles - had massive sales and mattered. That’s the whole point of this OP, near as I can tell…
Actually - just to be clear: the OP asked who the biggest rock band is and said “maybe measured by sales over the past 4 years” - I have, in my posts, attempted to suggest that, in addition to just sales, “mattering” was just as important.
I am NOT saying that the Velvets or the Stooges, etc. were EVER the Biggest Rock band in their day. But they mattered - and endure. So, to me, there must be something besides just sales that should factor in. So I am trying to think about bands that have big sales AND matter.
By the way - I would add the Red Hot Chili Peppers - big sales of a number of their albums and they matter as innovators and influencers of the current rock scene…
I was under the impression we were talking about the whole package - album sales, concert sales, relevancy, longevity, etc. Whether you personally like or dislike him is irrelevant and is largely dependent on how likely you were to fit in with the late teen/20-something frat guy Abercrombie and J Crew crowd over the past 15 years. People who fit in with the crowd, it’s cool to like DMB. People who don’t, it’s cool to hate his music. In any event, his peak was certainly in the mid to late 90s around the same time other jam bands like Rusted Root, Blues Traveler, and Phish were hitting it big.
But as I said, they don’t “rock”. The jam. big difference.
I would say U2 is consistently one of the biggest rock bands around and has been for the past 15-20 years. Coldplay doesn’t have the longevity (and they don’t really rock either). Motley Crue, Bruce Springsteen and others are just playing revivalist bullshit for 30 somethings trying to relive their glory days.
Metalica continues to reivent themselves however I don’t think they achieved the success of U2 quite yet.
Of course the bigger issue is that they just don’t make rock that “matters” anymore. It’s all pretentious post-grunge pop bullshit like Nickelback or Lifehouse that will largely be forgotten in a year or so.
I’d go with U2 as well.
Bruce Springsteen is up there if you consider him part of a band rather than a solo performer.
Aerosmith’s in the neighbourhood. But they’ve faded.
The Rolling Stones are out there and still sell tickets but they’re essentially a greatest hits band.
Sez the guy who apparently hasn’t heard Springsteen’s latest album 
A lot of bands, particularly on the jam scene, are not using that business model these days. These are groups that tour constantly whether they have a new album out or not.
[QUOTE=msmith537]
I was under the impression we were talking about the whole package - album sales, concert sales, relevancy, longevity, etc.
:rolleyes: I wasn’t rating him lower on the list because I don’t like him, I was just stating my opinion of him in response to the Futurama reference, which I guess you intended as a description rather than a put-down. I think we’re really agreeing here: he’s not at his commercial peak.
The OP did mention album sales specifically. I agree that that’s not the best way to measure how big a band is, but I was trying to also keep it in mind.
So people seem to think that U2 is the biggest band. How long has things been this way. Was it also the biggest band in the world in 1990? Did Nirvana surpass it in 1994?
At least you’ve of him ???
Regards Charlie
I mean to say at least you’ve heard of him ???
Maybe there was in the 1960s, or at some point prior to the existence of a national ‘underground’ music scene. Back when any band that had any influence whatsoever beyond a small local scene had to get mainstream exposure because there were no other avenues. It’s my little pet theory that Top 40 radio began to suck when the good groups discovered (or invented) the ability to get popular without having to write music that would ‘play in Peoria’. People write the 1970s off as a complete musical wasteland even though the majority of styles big now (heavy metal, punk (incl. post-punk and noise rock), and rap) were invented then. None of that groundbreaking music could shove ABBA and the Bee-Gees off the radio, however, nor did it need to in order to have an impact.