Also, the White Stripes. They may loom a little larger in my cosmology than yours; I think they still mainly play clubs. But they’ll still be a big deal when the Killers and Franz Ferdinand are quarter bin detritus.
What about The Dave Matthews Band? Not Rock?
Personally, I’d say “no”. But if Coldplay is being included, I guess we’re keeping the definition as loose as possible.
I think Radiohead and Prince also deserve consideration. Prince had two shows scheduled here in D.C. last year and demand was so high they had to add a third. Selling out the MCI Center three nights in a row is no small achievement. The one thing against him is that he hasn’t had a blockbuster single in quite some time.
You could say the exact same thing about Radiohead, but though they do release singles, they’re just not a singles-oriented band. People buy Radiohead albums for the album as a whole, and rarely cause they need to own a few songs off it. They have yet to even try touring arenas, though they sell out enormous ampitheaters and, when they headline a festival, pretty much everyone there makes it a point to see them play, which means they’re drawing about 50-70 thousand people.
But, yeah, U2 is really the only band these days that can sell out an outdoor stadium AND is still making music that’s both critically and commerically popular. The Stones and McCartney, and increasingly Aerosmith, are really just traveling nostalgia shows, I think.
As much as the music snobs would like to discount him, Dave Matthews Band is probably your mythical number two. They’re hugely popular. Put out a ton of high charting singles and they have a ridiculously fanatical following. The rest of the top 5 I think would look like this:
- Green Day
- Coldplay
- Sheryl Crow
Six and seven would probably be a shootout between The Foo Fighters and The White Stripes.
And Franz Ferdinand will be around a long, long time. I think The Killers are probably going to be the new Strokes. They’ll wish they could be the new Hives.
I think The White Stripes need a couple more years under their belt before they can be considered. Jack is coming on strong, however.
DMB, hmm, I dunno. Good choice, though.
Radiohead is a worthy pick.
Prince, whew, that’s a tough one. I hadn’t even considered Prince, because these days I consider him more of a R&B/Pop artist. I’m a huge fan, but I don’t think he makes the Top 5 given he’s dubious status as a “Rock Artist” and lack of radio singles in the last ten years.
Revised Top 5:
1) U2
2) Green Day
3) Foo Figthers
4) Aerosmith
5) Bon Jovi
BTW, Green Day gets major mojo points for releasing Jesus of Suburbia as a single (last quarter of Oct.). 
Would not Pearl Jam be somewhere quite high on this list?
(and I can’t believe Nickelback is even being seriously considered)
I think Pearl Jam follows under the “recent popular singles or CDs” rule.
Which is the same rule that makes Nickelback a moderate contender.
Well somebody’s buying them. A Bigger Bang reached #3; so did Bridges to Babylon; and Voodoo Lounge got to #2 (#1 in the UK). Their most recent live album flopped, but the Stones haven’t released a studio album that failed to make the Top 10 since their debut. (Chart statistics on Wikipedia.)
I work for a ticket broker (read: scalper) and I can attest, at least, for demand & resale value of some of these things. U2 & the Stones are far away leaders, although I think U2’s kind of overstayed their welcome & played tooooo many shows this year. Aerosmith, not so much. I’m surprised it took so long for Dave Matthews to poke up his little head, as he sells out constantly and has an obscene fan base, young & old (and hell, the first couple CDs are phenomenal). Green Day definately belongs up here. Springsteen too (and if you haven’t, read Mansion on the Hill–mesmerizing book about that gent).
And whoever poo-pooed Nickelback, well sir: I applaud you. For a variety of reasons. I’ve never sold a Nickelback ticket, never enjoyed a Nickelback song.
I’d mention, also, AC/DC & Kiss. Neither qualify as a number two in your criteria, but Kiss enjoys a rabid mob of alliegance while AC/DC…well, I just like AC/DC. They pump out singles every other year and sell out their fair share of arenas. Plus, you gotta love the school boy uni. Also, you’re pretty hard pressed to find AC/DC nay-sayers. Aerosmith on the other hand; don’t get me started.
Great question.
I agree that U2 is far and away #1 among relevant acts.
But the distance to Number 2 is huge. All the other bands are pretty weak in a historical sense. Green Day, Chili Peppers, Pearl Jam, Coldplay, etc… wouldn’t even be top 20 in the 1960s or 70s.
Spark made it to #13 on Billboard. That’s pretty radio friendly in my book. But you’re right about the decline in her popularity.
Green Day is certainly up there. When your least-popular album (“Warning”) still gets three or four mainstream radio hits, you are the definition of “big time.”
Radiohead are probably up there as well, although as someone mentioned, they don’t get much (if any) airplay, so their popularity is often masked. However, “Kid A” hit number one through nothing but online word-of-mouth, and they routinely sell out entire international stadium* tours, *with each show selling out within minutes of going on sale online.
You know, you raise a good point, The Stones have moved more units in recent years than I originally thought: A Bigger Bang (1 Mil.), Bridges To Babylon (1 Mil.), Voodoo Lounge (2 Mil.). Their lack of charted singles in recent years hurts them, but their total album sales and tour success keeps them in the running.
Bon Jovi drops down, The Stones move up:
1) U2
2) Green Day
3) Foo Figthers
4) Aerosmith
5) The Rolling Stones
Well I’m certainly not a big fan either, although I must admit I like their sorid tale of debauchery known as Figured You Out. Great rock song! But these guys have to be considered. Since 2000, they’ve had 11 Mainstream Rock hits, including 6 #1’s!
Their albums are huge as well: Silver Side Up (6 Mil. US - 8 Mil. CAN), The Long Road (3 Mil. US - 4 Mil. CAN), and their new one hit #1.
Like them or not, these guys are a force in the world of rock today.
My thoughts exactly. Huge, huge gap. It really is amazing just how big U2 really is!
When would that have been? U2’s been a mainstream-popular band, well, pretty much since anyone at all had heard of them.
With all due respect, anyone who thinks “The Joshua Tree” was an “alternative” album is using a different definition of “alternative” than any other human alive. I mean, forget the question of whether it sold too many copies to be alternative. Even if it hadn’t, what makes it “alternative”? They were already an immensely popular band; “Pride” was a monster hit BEFORE “The Joshua Tree.”
Nickelback’s a force in rock today?! This saddens me. I don’t doubt your numbers at all, but damn, are they awful. Not my cup o’ tea at all.
U2 was the very definition of “alternative” before The Joshua Tree. “Pride” was a moderate success for their breakthrough single, but they were still largely the darling of critics, college radio DJs, and cutting-edge fans. *Joshua Tree * is what catapulted them to the household name level of superstardom (and is, in many ways, one of their weakest albums – but that’s for a different conversation).
Cmon dude, you know you like Figured You Out. When you hear that in your car, you turn it up and sing it out loud like the rest of us.
“Pride” is off of “The Unforgettable Fire” which is their fourth album. I would say their Live Aid performance is what put them into the mainstream. Well, that and Bono’s highlighted mullet.
This jibes with my memory.
I think of U2 as having been “alternative” when compared to the “mainstream” rock acts of the early '80s like Styx, Journey, Foreigner, etc. I am thinking of the years between Boy and War, and maybe extending that into around the time the “Sunday Bloody Sunday” video first got into rotation on MTV.